Beyond Heterodoxy: Dwight Waldo and the Politics-Administration Dichotomy

Author(s): Patrick Overeem

Source: Public Administration Review , Jan. - Feb., 2008, Vol. 68, No. 1 (Jan. - Feb.,
2008), pp. 36-45
Published by: Wiley on behalf of the American Society for Public Administration

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/25145573

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Wiley and American Society for Public Administration are collaborating with JSTOR to
digitize, preserve and extend access to Public Administration Review

This content downloaded from

152.58.88.244 on Wed, 23 Aug 2023 06:52:00 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

Junior-Senior
Exchange:The
Legacy of Dwight
Waldo and The
Administrative
State
Patrick Overeem is a junior researcher
and teacher in the Department of Public
Administration at Leiden University in the
Netherlands. He is currently writing a
doctoral dissertation on the historical
meaning and constitutional sense of the
politics-administration dichotomy,
concentrating on American and Western
European political and administrative
thought since the early 19th century. His
work has been published in Administrative
Theory & Praxis and in the volume Retracing
Public Administration (with Mark Rutgers).
E-mail: overeem@fsw.leidenuniv.nl
Dwight Waldo (1913-2000) is often mentioned,
Waldo is known primarily as a representative of the
mid-20th-century critical position that he himself
36 Public Administration Review January | February 2008
Patrick Overeem
Leiden University
Beyond Heterodoxy: Dwight Waldo and the Politics
Administration Dichotomy
Dwight Waldo (1913?2000) is commonly known as a
"heterodox" critic of the dichotomy between politics and
administration. But is this reputation supported by his
writings? It seems to be primarily based on The Admin
istrative State (1948) and other early publications, in
which he conceptualized politics/administration narrowly
as deciding/executing and, indeed, sharply criticized
it. Waldos later publications, by contrast, offer much
broader conceptualizations and a more ambivalent, even
positive appraisal of the dichotomy. Such conceptualiza
tions are also found in an important unpublished book
Waldo worked on during several phases of his career. On
the basis of these published and unpublished writings, we
should reconsider Waldos reputation and, pursuing his
line of reasoning reconceptualize the politics?administration
dichotomy as a layered construct and reappreciate it as a
constitutional doctrine.
"Nothing is more central in thinking about public
administration than the nature and interrelations of
politics and administration. Nor are the nature and
interrelations of politics and administration matters
only for academic theorizing. What is more important
in the day-to-day, year-to-year, decade-to-decade
operation of government than the ways in which
politics and administration are conceptualized, ratio
nalized, and related one to the other?"
?Dwight Waldo, 1987
together with Herbert Simon, Paul Appleby,
and others, as "one of those who demolished
the pre-World War II . . . politics-administration
dichotomy" (Brown and Stillman 1986, 35). A recent
public administration theory textbook informs us that
"Waldo, perhaps more than anyone else, contributed
to the received wisdom that there is no such dichot
omy" (Frederickson and Smith 2003, 40). With
regard to the politics-administration dichotomy,
named "heterodoxy" (1948, 121).
This content downloaded from
152.58.88.244 on Wed, 23 Aug 2023 06:52:00 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
But is this reputation supported by his writings? It
seems principally based on his early publications,
particularly his masterful The Administrative State
(1948), which decisively refocused public administra
tion theory, especially in America, and which contin
ues to attract attention (Rosenbloom and McCurdy
2006). This work, probably more than any other,
established the alleged indefensibility of the politics
administration dichotomy, so that, for about half a
century, the dichotomy has been treated like geocen
trism in astronomy: Perhaps it was once believed in,
but now we know better. The new faith has pervaded
almost every subfield in the discipline, ranging from
personnel management to administrative ethics
(cf. Rosenbloom 1984; Yang and Holzer 2005). In
present-day literature, including that oh political
administrative relations, the dichotomy is often men
tioned only ritualistically and condescendingly (e.g.,
Meier and Bothe 2007, 45-46; Meier and O'Toole
2006, 6-7; Svara 2007, 37-38).
But if Waldo is our Copernicus, it will not seem disre
spectful, several years after his death, to examine his
legacy to the study of public administration more
closely and comprehensively.1 Next to The Administra
tive State, his other publications and his unpublished
writings should also be taken into account. Of special
interest here is an almost unknown, 600-page unpub
lished book written by Waldo about the relationship
between bureaucracy and democracy, which he worked
on during several phases of his long career and which
rivals The Administrative State as his magnum opus.
Waldos many writings about the politics-administration
dichotomy are discussed here in three groups:2 the early
publications, from the 1940s and 1950s; the later publi
cations, from the late 1970s onward; and the unpub
lished book. A few relevant publications from the 1960s
and early 1970s are also used, but they add little to
Waldos early position and to his present reputation. For
each body of writings, the focus is on Waldos conceptu
alization and evaluation of the dichotomy. Evidently, the
former influences the latter: How we understand the
dichotomy in large part determines whether we accept function and definition of politics?and then to
it or look for alternatives. In Waldo's case, it turns out carry out the decision?the role and definition of
that a relatively narrow understanding and negative administration" (1955, 40).
appraisal of the dichotomy in his early publications
gave way to broader conceptualizations and a more Deciding/executing is a rather narrow conceptualiza
ambivalent, even positive appraisal in his later publi tion of the dichotomy, dividing politics and
cations. Corresponding to this development, his ini administration on the basis of the functions
tial optimism about finding better alternatives turned performed by individual officials. It specifies politics
to skepticism and even pessimism. The passages on and administration as particular types of activity.
the dichotomy in the unpublished book reflect these As Waldo argued, first in The Administrative State
conceptual and evaluative developments. Therefore, I and later elsewhere, this functional approach was
conclude that, on the basis of his published and developed, in the American context at least, to "work
unpublished writings, we should reconsider Waldo's around" the constitutionally enshrined separation of
reputation as a heterodox critic of the politics powers (Brown and Stillman 1986, 153, 178). Early
administration dichotomy and reconceptualize and authors such as Frank Goodnow and William F.
reappreciate the dichotomy itself.3 Willoughby, as so many in the field after them, had
been generally "hostile to the tripartite separation
The Early Publications of powers" because it seemed to leave but little legiti
Finding Waldo's almost unequivocal abandonment of macy for public administration (1948, 105; but cf.
the politics-administration dichotomy in his early Vile 1998, 294). Although they did sometimes iden
publications is not difficult. In The Administrative tify politics with the legislative and administration
States important seventh chapter, he closes a discus with the executive branch of government (1948, 105
sion of the literature of "heterodoxy" with the 6; cf. 1955, 61; 1990, 76; OToole 1987, 17-18),
observation that "politics-administration, at least in they mostly tended to understand politics as the func
the you-go-your-way-and-I'll-go-mine form, is fast tion of making decisions and administration as the
becoming an outworn credo" (1948, 122). And the function of executing them.
chapter's first conclusion states that "either as a
description of the facts or a scheme of reform, any Post-World War II authors, such as Simon, Appleby,
simple division into politics-and-administration is and, indeed, Waldo himself, objected to this equa
inadequate" (1948, 128; cf. 207-8). Other examples tion of administration with execution. As Waldo
of Waldo's early critical attitude toward the dichotomy retrospectively put it, they emphasized that "much of
can be found, among others, in The Study of Public administrative action is not just mechanical applica
Administration (e.g., 1955, 60) and in the lecture series tion of political decisions made elsewhere but is
titled Perspectives on Administration (e.g., 1956, 38). suffused with politics and concerned with policy
This rejection of the dichotomy is very well known; it making" (Brown and Stillman 1986, 61). Yet Waldo
has earned Waldo his reputation for heterodoxy. also sharply criticized Simon's attempt to refound the
dichotomy between politics and administration (or,
What exactly it was that Waldo was so clearly rejecting in Simon's reading, policy and administration) on the
is much less known, however. How did Waldo distinction between "value" and "fact."4 In a 1952
conceptualize the dichotomy in his early publications? article, somewhat awkwardly titled "Development of
Close reading of the relevant Theory of Democratic Adminis
passages reveals that he had one tration," he rejected value/fact as a
dominant conceptualization of ".. .the process of government, detached surrogate to the tradi
politics/administration at the analytically considered, consists tional dichotomy (97-98). More
time?namely, deciding/execut of two parts only, namely, than a decade later, though having
ing. Near the end of The decision and execution. It is become milder on Simon, he still
Administrative State, for instance, believed that "a generation now
necessary first to decide what
he defines the "politics
administration formula" as "the
should be done?the function convinced that the separation of
politics and administration was a
notion that the work of govern and definition of politics?and gross error might view the fact
ment is divisible into two parts, then to carry out the decision?value dichotomy as but a variation
decision and execution" (1948, the role and definition of of a tired theme" (1965, 16; cf.
206; see also 14, 114). In The administration." 1975, 184; 1984a, xviii).
Study of Public Administration,
he calls it a central doctrine of In his early writings, Waldo often
public administration prior to 1940 "that the process added important qualifiers to his announcements of
of government, analytically considered, consists of two the dichotomy's death. The dichotomy is untenable
parts only, namely, decision and execution. It is neces particularly, perhaps only, in its "simple" and "sharp"
sary first to decide what should be done?the versions (1948, 128 and 207, respectively). Heterodoxy's

The Legacy of Dwight Waldo 37

This content downloaded from

152.58.88.244 on Wed, 23 Aug 2023 06:52:00 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 "disagreement is not generally with politics In a very Weberian way, the Royer lecture deals with
administration itself; only with the spirit of rigid democracy and bureaucracy in the broader context
separatism" (1948, 121). And of all possible kinds of of the modernization process. Democratization and
separatism, those that only try to distinguish politics bureaucratization are discussed as societal, not merely
and administration in theory are less problematic than governmental developments, pervading business and
those that also want to separate them in practice. education as well (1977, 9-10). Typically, Waldo
defined democracy substantively rather than proce
These nuances notwithstanding, the thrust of Waldo's durally as "a striving toward equality and freedom,"
argument is strongly dismissive. He wanted to make whereas for bureaucracy he adopted Weber's ideal-type
three things clear in his early publications: that the of modern, hierarchical organization based on rules
politics-administration dichotomy was widely endorsed and expertise (1977, 4-5; cf. 1980, 84-88). Given
in pre-World War II, "orthodox" these definitions, tensions be
public administration; that it was tween democracy and bureau
understood as a sharp separa .. .Waldo inferred two broad cracy must inevitably arise, as "the
tion, in theory and practice, and divergent traditions in principle of hierarchy stands
between deciding and executing; against the principle of equality,
Western cultural history, the
and that as such, it is both em
"civic culture tradition" and the and the principle of liberty stands
pirically and normatively unten against discipline, precision,
able. In recent years, public "imperial tradition," which have rules" (1977, 6; cf. 1984a, lv).
administration historiographers shaped the modern state, and Perhaps the two are not incom
have objected particularly to the particularly its tension between patible, but finding "the optimal
first claim (Bertelli and Lynn politics and administration, on mix' of democracy and bureau
2006; Lynn 2001; Svara 1998, both sides of the Atlantic. In its cracy" is a difficult "problem in
2001). But whether Waldo's social dynamics" (1977, 7-8; cf.
most powerful expression, 1980, 90).
historiography was correct or
not, his theoretical argument
Waldo's claim is that, as even
clearly marked him as heterodox etymology shows, "our politics In the 1980s and 1990s, Waldo
in the eyes of contemporary and are Greek, but our offered still further reflections on
later generations, as in his own. administration is Roman." the relation between democratic
By 1956, after his first stormy politics and bureaucratic adminis
decade in public administration, tration. In a bold little paper, he
the inadequacy of the politics-administration dichot argued that the broad history of Western thought
omy had become unquestionable fact to Waldo. The shows "a profound disjunction between politics and
issue seemed to be settled. Apart from some scattered administration" (1981, 3; cf. 1984b, 1987, 1990).
repetitions of the position in the meantime (e.g., He traced the roots of democratic politics back to the
1968b, 468; 1971, 264; 1972, 242), it would take ancient Greek polis and to the early modern republi
about two decades until the topic regained prominence can city-states. He found the roots of administrative
in Waldo's publications, albeit in a fundamentally organization in "the ancient empires of the Mid East
different shape. and the Mediterranean," most notably the Roman
Empire, and subsequently in the Roman Catholic
The Later Publications Church (1981, 3; cf 1987, 96-98; 1990, 77 \ Marini
One stimulus of Waldo's rethinking of the politics 1993, 416). From these two genealogies, Waldo in
administration dichotomy was his acquaintance, ferred two broad and divergent traditions in Western
shortly after publication of The Administrative State, cultural history, the "civic culture tradition" and the
with the newly translated writings of Max Weber on "imperial tradition," which have shaped the modern
bureaucracy. These struck him "almost as a revela state, and particularly its tension between politics and
tion" (1980, 118). Gradually, his problem of recon administration, on both sides of the Atlantic (1981, 3;
ciling politics and administration fused with Weber's cf. 1987, 98; 1990, 77). In its most powerful expres
problem of reconciling democracy and bureaucracy. sion, Waldo's claim is that, as even etymology shows,
Thus, democracy/bureaucracy rather than deciding/ "our politics are Greek, but our administration is
executing became the central conceptualization of Roman" (1987, 96; 1990, 78-79).
politics/administration in his later publications.
In fact, this had been the topic of the 1952 article on Whatever nuances this bold thesis may need, it points
"democratic administration" already, but after that to the deep roots of the politics-administration
the subject went underground, so to speak. It dichotomy in Western cultural history. These roots
returned in the 1977 Royer lecture titled "Democ go much deeper than late 19th-century Progressive
racy, Bureaucracy, and Hypocrisy," which was typical reformism: "[T]he perception of a distinction between
of Waldo's new approach to the subject (cf. Fry 1989, politics and administration is not simply an accidental
236-37). result of a certain period of American history, to be

38 Public Administration Review January | February 2008

This content downloaded from

152.58.88.244 on Wed, 23 Aug 2023 06:52:00 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
put aside as fiction or nonsense. The distinction is writ administration as counterintuitive. Unfortunately,
deep in several millennia of Western history" (1987, Waldo never elaborated the exact mechanism through
98; cf. 1988, 931; 1990, 78). For Waldo, the dichoto which the dichotomy works this beneficial effect, nor
my's antiquity suggests robustness; politics/adminis did he attempt to reconcile the dichotomy with the
tration is an age-old dualism in Western thought that separation-of-powers doctrine into one constitutional
will not disappear overnight: "If my thesis is valid that doctrine. He went no further than making the fasci
history has presented us with a dichotomy between nating suggestion that the former plays a role very
politics and administration, then presumably the similar to that of the latter:

distinction is deeply grounded indeed. In any case, the

related distinctions have a commonsense logic, a In a situation in which there is principled as
general acceptance, and a pragmatic usefulness. They well as practical lack of congruence between
are pervasive in our language and institutions. They politics an administration there are opportuni
cannot be discarded" (1987, 106). Nothing indicates ties as well as problems, freedoms as well as
Waldo's new position better than the emphasis, in his frustrations. It is close to the mark to say that
later publications, on "the perdurability of the problems of congruence are a defining charac
politics-administration dichotomy" (1984b). teristic of liberal-democratic institutions. Put
the other way around, the term totalitarian
Importantly, however, Waldo did not really replace his might best fit an entity in which politics and
original deciding/executing conceptualization. He administration are a seamless robe. (1987, 106)
continued ascribing it to the early authors, and in his
own approach it became the basis of other, more Superficially, Waldo's revaluation of the dichotomy as
complex conceptualizations. Indeed, he now even a conceptual and institutional construct might seem a
defended the deciding/executing interpretation as remarkable, but simple change of mind. Fundamental,
plausible and useful: "To decide to do something and however, is the change of meaning that underlies it:
then to proceed to act on?'carry out'?the decision Waldo was able to revalue the dichotomy because he
seems to fit the common sense world of both had reconceptualized it. Whereas he used (and
individual and collective behavior" (1984b, 232; cf. rejected) only one narrow conceptualization of the
1980, 69; 1987, 106). "The twofold schema has too politics-administration dichotomy in his early publi
much going for it in logic and usefulness simply to cations, he added (and accepted) several broader
disappear. We do, commonsensically, decide and conceptualizations in his later publications. Thus, the
execute, set policy and administer" (Brown and politics-administration puzzle acquired an increasing
Stillman 1986, 153). number of pieces, but it also became a piece of still
larger puzzles. Relating politics and administration
Now, Waldo not only advocated the distinction was no longer an exclusively American problem; it was
between politics and administration in theory, but he a problem of at least all modern democracies. Adopt
also revalued their separation in practice. He still saw ing this broader perspective, Waldo went not simply
the objections, empirical and normative, against a against, but rather beyond, his earlier heterodox
very strict institutional separation (e.g., 1971, 264; position.
1977, 9; 1980, 68-69; 1987, 93). Such a situation he
even called "the Nuremberg-Eichmann scenario" An Insoluble Problem
(1987, 93; cf. 1971, 267). But he also rejected Waldo's diversifying conceptualization and his grow
abolishing or ignoring the dichotomy as illusory and ing acceptance of the dichotomy were mirrored by
Utopian. It could indeed be pernicious, possibly (if shifting expectations about the possibility of finding
unintentionally) leading to undemocratic, even satisfactory alternatives, or, in his own terminology,
totalitarian outcomes: "[A] near complete integration "solutions." In The Administrative States first edition,
of politics and administration is a rather good charac Waldo was quite confident about developing "a more
terization of totalitarianism, and perhaps liberty is a adequate philosophy of the powers and functions of
product of disjunction" government, their nature and inter
(Brown and Stillman 1986, relation" (1948, 128-29; cf. 1980,
137; cf. Waldo 1981,5; Waldo s diversifying 77). But his optimism waned.
1984b, 232; 1990, 82; Carroll In the second edition, he had
conceptualization and his
and Frederickson 2001, 7).5 to admit that the hoped-for
growing acceptance of the
"emergence of a new synthesis . . .
dichotomy were mirrored by now seems remote" (1984a, lv; cf.
The suggestion that the poli
tics-administration dichotomy shifting expectations about the 1984a, xlii; 1965, 16; Rosenbloom
serves a crucial function in possibility of finding satisfactory 2006,91, 103).
the preservation of democratic alternatives, or, in his own
freedom will strike most Something similar happened
terminology, "solutions."
present-day students of public with several other solutions Waldo

The Legacy of Dwight Waldo 39

This content downloaded from

152.58.88.244 on Wed, 23 Aug 2023 06:52:00 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 suggested. Apart from the rejected suggestion to divide with the help of Frank Marini, in 1999?but despite
politics and administration along Simon's value/fact repeated efforts to ameliorate it, particularly after his
line, Waldo mentions at least four other solutions in retirement in 1979, he was never satisfied with the
his oeuvre, namely, to adopt "the idea of a pyramid result (1977, 1-2; 1980, 81-82; Brown and Stillman
of values'" so that "the rigid division between politics' 1986, 133). The main reason he could not finish the
and administration is replaced by an organic inter book was simply the unmanageable vastness of the
relation" (1948, 205); to use policy case studies so as subject: "As I pursued the project. . . the matter be
to "portray politics and administration as a continu came ever more complicated and problematical. Al
ous, indivisible process" (1968b, 468; cf. 1984a, xxi); ways there were more subjects that seemed relevant
to treat public administration less as a scientific disci and about which I should know more before
pline and more as a profession like medicine, so as to proceeding to firm conclusions. Always there were
give it its own legitimacy next to politics (1980, 77-78; books, old and new, to be examined and perhaps
1987, 107); and finally, to use the encompassing mastered before I put my own thoughts into order?
concept of "government" so as to "repair the breach and into print" (1982, foreword, 1). So far, the
of the politics-administration dichotomy" (Brown public administration community has only seen
and Stillman 1986, 168). "occasional glimpses" of the work in Waldo's
publications (Marini 1993, 416).6
We can easily understand why Waldo only mentioned
and never really elaborated on these suggestions. They Four Passages
either introduce other conceptualizations of politics/ Although the book's central theme closely relates to
administration (value/fact, higher values/lower values, the politics-administration dichotomy, Waldo mostly
policy making/policy implementation, amateur/pro treats the dichotomy as a specific subject. Apart from
fessional) or they offer an encompassing concept to many scattered mentions throughout the book, there
cover up that distinction (government). None of are four longer passages dealing explicitly with the
them, however, clearly specifies how politics and dichotomy that deserve our attention here.
administration can be simultaneously separated and
related in a constitutional democracy. In the first passage, from the introductory chapter,
Waldo explains how politics/administration relates to
Overall, Waldo's initial optimism about the chances of democracy/bureaucracy (1982,1, 7-10; cf. 1999,
finding satisfactory solutions or alternatives turned to 12-16). He holds "that in government the problem
skepticism and even outright pessimism (1971, 265 of relating bureaucracy and democracy is an aspect or
66; 1977, 9; 1984a, xxxiv). With one of his typical subset of the problem of relating the bureaucratic (or
paradoxes, he concluded that "we can neither live with administrative-managerial) and the political' (1982,
or without the distinction, realistically separate the two I, 7 or 1999, 12).7 In Waldo's conceptual framework,
or find an agreed, proper joining. Western history, our "The historical relationship between bureaucracy and
constitutional structure, our political experience, and democracy is not symmetrical" (1999, 18; cf. 1982, I,
our institutional development combine to present us 10). Whereas democracy is just one variant of politics,
with a problem that cannot be solved in any definitive typical for late modern times and states only, bureau
sense. . . . But the problem must, nevertheless, be cracy is a universal characteristic of all civilizations, on
dealt with: it is there" (1984a, lv). In the end, he could equal footing with such general concepts as adminis
only recommend a modest and pragmatic approach: tration and government (cf. 1982, IV, 16 or 1999,
"I believe that the problem is such that it cannot be 195). So democracy/bureaucracy is but the particular
solved?acceptably, workably?given our constitu form in which politics/administration is framed in
tional system, our constitutional history, and our modern Western governments; other forms can be
democratic ideology. All we can hope for is piecemeal found elsewhere. Given the complexity of the prob
solutions, temporary agreements" (1984a, xviii; lem, an "optimum balance or mix of bureaucracy and
cf. 1981, 6; also Lowery 2001). democracy," let alone one "grand solution," is very
hard to conceive and attain (1982, I, 9-10 or 1999,
The "Great Unpublished Book" 16-17).
The third body of Waldos writings to be discussed
here is his "great unpublished book" (Brown and In the second passage (1982, III, 43-45; cf. 1999,
Stillman 1986, 71, 133), dealing with the vast theme 160-64) and in the third (1982, V, 42-47 or 1999,
of the relationship between democracy and 280-85), Waldo does little more than rehearse the
bureaucracy in the history of Western civilization. story of the orthodox endorsement and the heterodox
Waldo got the idea for writing the book after his 1952 abandonment of the dichotomy. The understanding
article on democratic administration, the one that he shows for the orthodox position is noticeable. In
kindled the polemic with Simon. After that, he various ways, he emphasizes that the dichotomy had
worked on it for almost half a century. Three times he theoretical value in "structuring scholarly-professional
completed a full manuscript?in 1955, in 1982, and, approaches to the relationship between bureaucracy

40 Public Administration Review January | February 2008

This content downloaded from

152.58.88.244 on Wed, 23 Aug 2023 06:52:00 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
and democracy" and practical value in "rationalizing
political 'reform' movements seeking to improve that
relationship" (1982, V, 42; cf. 1999, 280). The
dichotomy "was an integral part of the 'search for
order,'" it "fitted a need," it "lent itself to the purposes
of both academics and reformers," and it "needs to
be viewed in context" (1982, V, 42-45; cf. 1999,
281-84).
As we know, all this could not prevent the fact that in
the 1930s, 1940s, and 1950s, the dichotomy was
increasingly criticized as "something once believed in
but now known to be false" (1982, V, 46 or 1999,
284-85). But then, as in an afterthought, Waldo
objects to the heterodox view, once his own, that we
can really rid ourselves of the dichotomy:
But though outmoded in academia and no
longer a prominent and convincing principle
of reform, the politics-administration formu
lation survives in many ways. Nor is it likely
to disappear. Given a human proclivity for
dichotomous formulations and the associa
tions of politics-administration with decision
execution, the politics-administration
formulation has an intuitive appeal and a
commonsense usefulness. In many situations it
represents a first approximation to under
standing; and in some situations it may be a
sufficient rationale for action. (1999, 285;
cf. 1982, V, 46-47)
In other words, notwithstanding its unpopularity, the
politics-administration dichotomy remains helpful to
understand and order governmental reality.
Compared to the other passages, the fourth and
final passage on the dichotomy (1982, IX, 4-7; cf.
1999, 520-25) is more reflective and evaluative. It
describes the problem posed by the dichotomy as a
"problem in 'social mechanics,' a problem that inter
weaves Constitutional, legal, ideological, moral, and
prudential considerations together with both politi
cal and administrative considerations" (1999,
520; cf. 1982, IX, 4-5). Stressing, again, that the
dichotomy "between politics (deciding, willing) and
administration (carrying out, doing)" served practi
cal and theoretical needs of the reformers, Waldo
shows himself ambivalent about the benefits of its
repudiation: "[T]he decline and 'crisis' of the politics
administration formula has both exposed problems
and created opportunities. It is not entirely clear
what the problems are; certainly no agreement exists
on their definition and mode of solution. And what
are problems, what opportunities, varies with the
perceiver" (1982, IX, 5 or 1999, 521-22). He is
unconvinced that the net result of more than one
century of reflection on the dichotomy is very posi
tive. In his opinion, the heterodox abandonment
152.58.88.244 on Wed, 23 Aug 2023 06:52:00 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
of the dichotomy has left us "in a quandary: It
appears that we can neither accept the politics
administration formula nor get along without it"
(1982, IX, 6 or 1999, 522).
Waldo concludes his reflections with some pessimistic
and optimistic remarks. On the pessimistic side, there
is little chance that a truly satisfactory way to differen
tiate and relate politics and administration will ever be
found:
I cannot image the production or invention of
any simple formula or "answer" to replace the
politics-administration formula. We must, I
believe, continue to live with some aspects of
that formula. It has, after all, a commonsensical
appeal and a fair correspondence with reality.
No one, for example, would identify a county
meeting of Democratic party leaders with ad
ministration, or operation of machinery in the
Government Printing Office with politics. But
beyond a point, and over a large area, the di
chotomy is blurred or invisible and thus lost as
a principle of organization and operation.
(1982, IX, 6; cf. 1999, 522-23)
On the optimistic side, the present situation also has
some advantages. First, the quandary stimulates "the
search for other solutions, solutions more in accord
with facts and needs"; second, the supposed break
down of the dichotomy allows for an "extension of
democratic methods and objectives" to the adminis
trative parts of government and even to hybrid or
private organizations; and third, the disjunction
between the Greek and Roman traditions, "while it
creates problems, offers benefits and increases potenti
alities" for combining the strongest points of each
(1982, IX, 7; cf. 1999, 524-25).
This necessarily very selective review shows that,
throughout the unpublished book, Waldo tries to
accommodate his early critique of the dichotomy to
his later reconceptualization and revaluation. His
ultimate stance is therefore highly nuanced and am
bivalent. Compared to the later publications, the book
offers not so much new ideas on the dichotomy but,
to use a geological metaphor, a beautiful sedimenta
tion of Waldo's thought showing different layers from
different periods.
Reconsidering Waldo and the Dichotomy
On the basis of Waldo's publications and his unpub
lished writings on the subject, both his reputation
as a heterodox critic of the dichotomy and the dichot
omy itself need to be reconsidered. Waldo's present
reputation is not completely unwarranted: It does find
support in the early publications and partially in the
later publications (obviously the unpublished book has
not contributed to the reputation). The reputation is
The Legacy of Dwight Waldo 41
This content downloaded from
 Table 1 The Politics-Administration Dichotomy as a Layered
that in order to comprehend how politics and admin
Construct
istration differ and how they relate, it will not do to
reduce politics/administration to only one or some o
Politics Administration Level of Analysis
the possible conceptualizations, let alone to keep
Deciding Executing Individual public introducing new ones. It seems better to give up on
official
Value Fact Decision-making Waldo's quest for the perfect reconceptualization an
process to take politics/administration, complex as it is, as th
Legislative Executive American most meaningful "formula" itself.
constitutional system
Democracy Bureaucracy Modern government
Waldo himself sometimes takes us one final step
and society
Civic culture Imperial Western historical further, however, than his merely negative position
tradition tradition traditions that "we can neither live with or without" the dicho
omy. He suggests that, in a fundamental sense, the
dichotomy's indispensability precedes its indefensibi
incomplete, however, and apparently based on a superfi
ity. Ridding ourselves of the dichotomy, or replacing
cial and partial reading of Waldo's oeuvre that overlooks
it, is not merely impossible but undesirable. Waldo
two points. First, when Waldo rejected the dichotomy,
perceived that the dichotomy serves an important
he primarily, if not exclusively, understood it in afunction
strict in the preservation of freedom in constitu
and narrow sense. And second, in his later writings, he democracies and reminded us that it is painful
tional
clearly spoke up for the dichotomy. Not only could he in dictatorial and totalitarian regimes. As we
absent
envisage no satisfactory alternative to the dichotomy,
know, such regimes are typically ruled by party
but he also recognized and developed arguments officials
in its who cannot be recognized as either politician
favor. Presenting Waldo as a champion of the dichot
or administrators. In this light, much contemporary
omy would overstate the matter?his final position
criticism of the dichotomy in (American) public ad
remained one of nuance, ambivalence, and often ministration seems to start from a luxury position in
aporia?but when these two points are duly acknowl
which a relatively clear and stable division of roles a
edged, it will be much more difficult for those who
responsibilities is negligently taken for granted.
argue against the dichotomy to invoke Waldos name.
Surely, the Waldonian understanding of the dichot
Hence my rereading of Waldo's writings is of more omy as a constitutional doctrine requires deeper
than purely historiographic significance; it has reflection.
theo In particular, its relation to the separation
retical and practical implications. Taking Waldo's later
of-powers doctrine remains a major puzzle. Revaluin
writings (more) seriously must lead to a reconsidera
the politics-administration dichotomy for its role in
tion of the politics-administration dichotomy itself.
the preservation of democratic freedom might well
We have found that Waldo's oeuvre offers a variety of most challenging suggestion that Waldo has
be the
conceptualizations of politics/administration, that
bequeathed to us.9
these conceptualizations became increasingly broad in
Acknowledgments
scope, but that the older, narrow conceptualizations
were not really replaced but rather wrapped upMark
in the
Rutgers and Sebastiaan Tijsterman gave helpful
comments on earlier versions of this article. Richard
new ones.8 Taking these findings together and pursuing
the line of reasoning, we can depict the politics
Stillman and Frank Marini kindly entrusted the 198
administration dichotomy as a layered construct,and 1999 versions of Waldo's "great unpublished book
conceptualized in different ways at various levels
toof
me. The libraries of Leiden University and Syracus
analysis (see table 1). University were willing to archive copies of its (more
complete) 1999 version in order to make the manuscrip
This layered understanding of the politics available to the wider public administration community
administration dichotomy helps us understand why
Notes
Waldo never managed "either to discard the politics
administration distinction or to find a formula 1.
toThere is no need here to add another overview of
Waldo's
unite the two" (1982, IX, 7 or 1999, 524). On the work to those that have been written

one hand, it shows that the dichotomy is a manyboth during his lifetime (Avila 1992; Brown and
sided construct that cannot be discarded, perhapsStillman
a 1986; Frederickson and Marini 1997a,

many-headed monster that can never be slain. Waldo

1997b; Fry 1989; Laohavichien 1983; Marini
himself had to learn that his early attacks on the 1993;
de Raadschelders 1998) and after since his
death (Carroll and Frederickson 2001; Frederickson
ciding/executing conceptualization left other concep
tualizations untouched. He admitted that "what was
2000; Lowery 2001; Wamsley 2001).
'rejected' may have been oversimplified, distorted"
2. Waldo himself probably coined the phrase "politics
(1968c, 13; cf. 1971, 264). On the other hand, the administration dichotomy" (Marini 1993, 412);
layered conceptualization of the dichotomy also shows
if not, he certainly gave it wide currency. In his

42 Public Administration Review January | February 2008

This content downloaded from

152.58.88.244 on Wed, 23 Aug 2023 06:52:00 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 earliest publications, he used it only rarely and
among other expressions (Svara 1999, 681-82),
but in his later writings, he employed it much
more readily.
3. Of the many issues covered in Waldo's oeuvre, the
dichotomy or relation between politics and
administration occupied him most. Parts of
Waldo's biography may help to explain his
continuous interest in the theme: his wartime
experience in the Washington bureaucracy, which
turned out to be unexpectedly "politicized"; the
shift, early in his academic career, from political
theory to the study of public administration; and
the experience of tensions and schism between
political science and public administration,
particularly during his time at Berkeley
(cf. Brown and Stillman 1986).
4. That Simon indeed proposed value/fact as a new
fundamentum divisionis of politics/administration
has been too little recognized. In the introductory
sentences to Administrative Behaviors third
chapter, he states that the distinction between
value and fact"clarifies the distinction, so often
made in the literature of administration, between
policy questions and questions of administration"
(1997, 55; emphasis added). At the end of that
chapter he goes further: "While not identical
with the separation of Value' from 'fact,' such a
division [of the decisional functions of policy and
administration] would clearly be dependent on
that fundamental distinction" (1997, 66; empha
sis added). Indeed, the distinction "between
the value elements and the factual elements in
decision-making" is "the basis for the line that is
commonly drawn between questions of policy
and questions of administration" (1997, 67;
emphasis added).
5. Tellingly, Waldo named George Orwell's 1984 as
the prototypical combination of the genres of the
political novel and the administrative novel
(1968a, 25).
6. For this article, copies of the 1982 and 1999 ver
sions of the manuscript could be used. Unfortu
nately, especially in view of the diachronical
perspective adopted here, the 1955 version could
not be obtained. Whether it is still extant is
unclear; at least it was not found in the Dwight
Waldo Papers archived at Syracuse University. Of
the two versions used, the 1982 version is entirely
of Waldo's own hand and must be taken as the
more authentic one. That version is therefore
usually quoted here. Parallel references to the 1999
version are also given (with "or" when the parallel
passage is identical, and with "cf." when it is differ
ent; "Waldo and Marini" is omitted). Because
the 1982 version of the manuscript restarts page
numbering in each chapter, references to it give
both the chapter number (Roman numerals) and
page number. References to the 1999 version give
152.58.88.244 on Wed, 23 Aug 2023 06:52:00 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
the page number only. Except for some editorial
improvements in the 1999 version, often based on
handwritten notes in the margin of the 1982
version, the main differences between them are
the following: (1) The 1982 version contains an
additional "memo to readers" and a foreword about
the manuscript's status and background, both
lacking in the 1999 version; (2) the 1999 version
consisted of eleven instead of nine chapters because
of a split of two chapters of the 1982 version (on
the history and theory of bureaucracy and democ
racy, respectively); (3) compared to the 1982
version, the 1999 version has some additional
passages, mostly of political theoretical content and
apparently inserted by Marini: one on democratic
theory, two on the politics-administration dichot
omy (of about 15 and 20 lines, respectively), one on
Jefferson, Tocqueville, and Mill, one on "realistic
democracy," and one large passage on postmodern
ism in public administration. The additional
passages about the dichotomy are used here, but
they contain nothing that cannot also be found in
Waldo's publications.
7. Confusingly, Waldo had elsewhere called the
politics-administration dichotomy "[p]art of the
story of the interrelating of democracy and bureau
cracy" (1977, 8). The solution of the paradox
might be that, although democracy/bureaucracy is
narrower than politics/administration in the sense
that it specifies particular, typically modern forms
of political and administrative organization, it is
broader in the sense that it extends beyond the
limits of government to modern society and
business as well.
8. Waldo was well aware of his frequent use of
dichotomies: "I have speculated that dichoto
mies or paired opposites have a base in the
biology of the brain, given their prominence in
our thought ways" (1987, 111 n. 18). The
use of dichotomies is typical for what has been
called "the Waldonian approach" (Carroll and
Frederickson 2001, 2, 5; cf. McCurdy and
Rosenbloom 2006).
9. Paradoxically, the constitutional value of dichoto
mizing politics and administration in practice can
only be apprehended when the main lesson of
The Administrative State is applied and administra
tive and political (or constitutional) theory are
not dichotomized.
References
Avila, Philip J. 1992. The Power and the Glory: A
Preliminary Investigation of the Effects of
Eurocentrism on the Development of Public
Administration in the Western Tradition from
Plato to Dwight Waldo. Master's thesis, Kutztown
University.
Bertelli, Anthony M., and Laurence E. Lynn, Jr. 2006.
Madison's Managers: Public Administration and the
The Legacy of Dwight Waldo 43
This content downloaded from
 Constitution. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University
Press.
Brown, Brack, and Richard J. Stillman II. 1986. A
Search for Public Administration: The Ideas and
Career of Dwight Waldo. College Station: Texas
A&M University Press.
Carroll, James D., and H. George Frederickson. 2001.
Dwight Waldo, 1913-2000. Public Administration
Review 61(1): 2-8.
Frederickson, H. George. 2000. How I Became a
Waldonian. PA Times, December, 11.
Frederickson, H. George, and Frank Marini. 1997a.
Bureaucracy and Democracy: Essays in Honor of
Dwight Waldo. Public Administration Review
57(3): 190-92.
-. 1997b. The Waldo Symposium. Journal of
Public Administration Research and Theory 7(3):
389-92.
Frederickson, H. George, and Kevin B. Smith. 2003.
The Public Administration Theory Primer. Boulder,
CO: Westview Press.
Fry, Brian R. 1989. Mastering Public Administration:
From Max Weber to Dwight Waldo. Chatham, NJ:
Chatham House.
Laohavichien, Uthai. 1983. Dwight Waldo: The
Leading Light of Public Administration for Three
Decades. Philippine Journal of Public
Administration 27(1): 1 -22.
Lowery, George. 2001. Dwight Waldo: Putting
the Purpose in PA. Maxwell Perspective, Spring.
http://www.maxwell.syr.edu/perspective/Spr01_
waldo_main.htm [accessed October 30, 2007].
Lynn, Laurence E., Jr. 2001. The Myth of the
Bureaucratic Paradigm: What Traditional Public
Administration Really Stood For. Public
Administration Review 61(2): 144-60.
Marini, Frank. 1993. Leaders in the Field: Dwight
Waldo. Public Administration Review 53(5):
409-18.
McCurdy, Howard E., and David H. Rosenbloom.
2006. Conclusion: Additional Notes on the Present
Tendencies. In Revisiting Waldos Administrative
State: Constancy and Change in Public
Administration, edited by David H. Rosenbloom
and Howard E. McCurdy, 203-16. Washington,
DC: Georgetown University Press.
Meier, Kenneth J., and John Bohte. 2007. Politics and
the Bureaucracy: Policymaking in the Fourth Branch
of Government. 5th ed. Belmont, CA: Thomson/
Wadsworth.
Meier, Kenneth J., and Laurence J. O'Toole, Jr. 2006.
Bureaucracy in a Democratic State: A Governance
Perspective. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University
Press.
O'Toole, Laurence J., Jr. 1987. Doctrines and
Developments: Separation of Powers, the Politics
administration Dichotomy, and the Rise of the
Administrative State. Public Administration Review
47(1): 17-25.
44 Public Administration Review January | February 2008
This content downloaded from
152.58.88.244 on Wed, 23 Aug 2023 06:52:00 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Raadschelders, Jos C.N. 1998. "Get It Done, See It
Through": "The Administrative State" van Dwight
Waldo. Bestuurskunde7{4): 157-65.
Rosenbloom, David H. 1984. Reconsidering the
Politics-Administration Dichotomy: The Supreme
Court and Public Personnel Management. In
Politics and Administration: Woodrow Wilson and
American Public Administration, edited by Jack
Rabin and James S. Bowman, 103-18. New York:
Marcel Dekker.
-. 2006. The Separation of Powers. In
Revisiting Waldos Administrative State: Constancy
and Change in Public Administration, edited by
David H. Rosenbloom and Howard E. McCurdy,
87-107. Washington, DC: Georgetown
University Press.
Rosenbloom, David H., and Howard E. McCurdy,
eds. 2006. Revisiting Waldos Administrative
State: Constancy and Change in Public
Administration. Washington, DC: Georgetown
University Press.
Simon, Herbert A. 1997. Administrative Behavior: A
Study of Decision-Making Processes in Administrative
Organizations. 4th ed. New York: Free Press.
Svara, James H. 1998. The Politics-Administration
Dichotomy as Aberration. Public Administration
Review 58(1): 51-58.
-. 1999. Complementarity of Politics and
Administration as a Legitimate Alternative to the
Dichotomy Model. Administration & Society 30(6):
676-705.
-. 2001. The Myth of the Dichotomy:
Complementarity of Politics and Administration in
the Past and Future of Public Administration.
Public Administration Review 61 (2): 176-83.
-. 2007. The Ethics Primer for Public
Administrators in Government and Nonprofit
Organizations. Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett.
Vile, Maurice J.C. 1998. Constitutionalism and the
Separation of Powers. 2nd ed. Indianapolis, IN:
Liberty Fund.
Waldo, Dwight. 1948. The Administrative State: A
Study of the Political Theory of American Public
Administration. New York: Ronald Press.
-. 1952. "Development of Theory of
Democratic Administration." American Political
Science Review 46(1): 81-103.
-. 1955. The Study of Public Administration.
New York: Random House.
-. 1956. Perspectives on Administration.
University: University of Alabama Press.
-. 1965. The Administrative State Revisited.
Public Administration Review 25(1): 5-30.
-. 1968a. The Novelist on Organization and
Administration: An Inquiry into the Relationship
between Two Worlds. Berkeley: Institute of
Governmental Studies, University of California.
-. 1968b. Public Administration. Journal of
Politics 30(2): 443-79.
-. 1968c. Scope of the Theory of Public
Administration. In Theory and Practice of Public
Administration: Scope, Objectives, and Methods,
edited by James C. Charlesworth, 1-26.
Philadelphia: American Academy of Political and
Social Science.
-. 1971. Public Administration in a Time of
Turbulence: Some Thoughts on Alternatives,
Dilemmas, and Paradoxes. In Public Administration
in a Time of Turbulence, edited by Dwight Waldo,
257-85. San Francisco: Chandler.
-. 1972. Developments in Public
Administration. Annals of the American Academy of
Political and Social Studies 404: 217-45.
-. 1975. Education for Public Administration
in the Seventies. In American Public
Administration: Past, Present, Future, edited by
Frederick C. Mosher, 181-232. Syracuse, NY:
Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs/
National Association of Schools of Public Affairs
and Administration.
-. 1977. Democracy, Bureaucracy, and Hypocrisy.
Berkeley: Institute of Governmental Studies,
University of California.
-. 1980. The Enterprise of Public Administration:
A Summary View. 5th ed. Novato, CA: Chandler
&C Sharp.
-. 1981. Politics and Administration: A
Profound Disjunction. Dialogue 4(1): 1-6.
-. 1982. Bureaucracy and Democracy:
Thinking about Conflict and Complementarity.
Unpublished manuscript.
152.58.88.244 on Wed, 23 Aug 2023 06:52:00 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
-. 1984a. The Administrative State: A Study of the
Political Theory of American Public Administration.
2nd ed. New York: Holmes & Meier.
-. 1984b. The Perdurability of the Politics
Administration Dichotomy: Woodrow Wilson and
the "Identity Crisis" of Public Administration. In
Politics and Administration: Woodrow Wilson and
American Public Administration, edited by Jack
Rabin and James S. Bowman, 219-33. New York:
Marcel Dekker.
-. 1987. Politics and Administration: On
Thinking about a Complex Relationship. In
A Centennial History of the American Administrative
State, edited by Ralph Clark Chandler, 89-112.
New York: Free Press.
-. 1988. The End of Public Administration?
Public Administration Review 48(5): 929-32.
-. 1990. A Theory of Public Administration
Means in Our Time a Theory of Politics Also. In
Public Administration: The State of the Discipline,
edited by Naomi B. Lynn and Aaron Wildavsky,
73-83. Chatham, NJ: Chatham House.
Waldo, Dwight, and Frank Marini. 1999.
Bureaucracy and Democracy: A Strained
Relationship. Unpublished manuscript.
Wamsley, Gary L. 2001. Reflections on the Passing of
Dwight Waldo. Administration & Society 33(3):
247-50.
Yang, Kaifeng, and Marc Holzer. 2005. Re
approaching the Politics/Administration
Dichotomy and Its Impact on Administrative
Ethics. Public Integrity 7(2): 111-27.
The Legacy of Dwight Waldo 45
This content downloaded from