Proverbs Of Administration Analysis

The reading “The Proverbs of Administration” written by Herbert A. Simon analyzes the elements under the administrative theory. The author provides a diagnosis of the elements by presenting a different shift to the study that reveal that under different situations some elements are not clearly defined or established. The reading begins it discussion by analyzing the types of “accepted criteria” of administrative principles such as dividing the workers in four types of segments. Simon argued, “Administrative efficiency is increased by grouping the workers, for purposes of control, according to (a) purpose, (b) process, (c) clientele, or (d) place…” (p.103). In the same way, other accepted criteria for administrative efficiency are specialization,

Additionally, unity of command should be clearly established so that the subordinates are able to locate the authority and be obedient by a single person. Simon argued, “Analysis of this “principle” requires a clear understanding of what is meant by the term “authority”” (p.104). In regards to the span of control, should better clarify why three, five and seven are appropriate numbers for limiting the number of subordinates. Simon made a point in which he describes that the development of these concepts were not clearly defined and have problems in the description to be scientifically useful. Simon argued, “Administrative description suffers currently from superficiality, oversimplification, lack of realism” (p.111). As a result, the author supported that the depiction of administrative theory should be

“Consequently, it leaves unsettled the very important question of how authority should be zoned in a particular organization (the modes of specialization) and through what channels it should be exercised” (p. 105).
The second tenet unit of command is argued by Simon by not specifically established that during disagreements or conflicts specialization then not compatible. The lack of authority form supervisors in case of conflicts, may not be to resolve issues by applying the appropriate sanctions or penalties to resolve the problem.
3. ””Organization by major purpose”, says Gulick, “…serves to bring together in a single large department all of those who are at work endeavoring to render a particular service”” (p.108).
The fourth tenet organization by purpose is then contrasted by Simon by not considering that one single purpose can lead to several objectives in accordance with the language and techniques utilized by the organization. Similarly, the author argues that there is not so much difference between “process’” and “purpose since there is only a difference of degree. This proves that Simon stated his point by disseminating the language and concepts of the theory of administration which puts into evidence the methodological