The Future of Merit and the Civil Service System - Essay Example

? The Future of Merit and the Civil Service System Introduction In the modern plethora, the concept of meritocratic civil services system has emergedas a debatable point of concern among experts, which at times have been affirmed as a fundamental facet of the dimension, and at times, also argued as quaint and negligible in its idealism. To put it simply, the moot point as to whether merit should be considered as a basic tenet in civil services system or it can be neglected to an extent, have attracted debaters from various fields of economic, social and political paradigms. Subsequently, polarization in the thought and perceptions of opposers and supporters of the argument is also identifiable in literature studies. Illustratively, Condrey & Battaglio (2007) argued that in past few years, the principles related with merit in practice have been altered in the US civil service system. Nevertheless, irrespective of all the changes observed, the meritocratic idealism in the system remains to be a noteworthy aspect, especially when focusing on efficient decision making criteria in the Human Resources Management (HRM) dimension (Condrey & Battaglio, 2007). In contradiction of these notions, Ingraham (2006) reveals a sense of skepticism to the viability of the principles as well as the practices related with merit in modern civil services system. Asserting various issues or challenges in relation to determine the future of merit in the civil service system, Ingraham (2006) argues with respect to underdeveloped governmental performance as linked with the reform of civil services, particularly with performances and diminished democratic responsibilities for the same. With this concern, the essay intends to compare the arguments postulated in the two articles of Ingraham (2006) and Condrey & Battaglio (2007) emphasizing the significance of a meritocratic civil service system in the modern US context. While contrasting the two articles, a summary of their major points will be noted followed by the assessment of their strengths and weaknesses and similarities as well as dissimilarities. Inferences will also be drawn from the assessment to critically review the themes taken into concern, i.e. the applicability of the socio-political judgments delivered in each of these articles, along with the extent of significance that a meritocratic civil services system has in the modern US society. In precise, the arguments of this essay will be based on the following themes, which will further act as a base for its framework. The central point of debate in the two articles concerning the significance of merit in the reformed civil services system of the US Socio-political implications of the inferences drawn and their reliability Summative lessons obtainable from the articles Brief summary of the central point of debate in the two articles “A Return to Spoils? Revisiting Radical Civil Service Reform in the United States” The major points argued in the article titled, “A Return to Spoils? Revisiting Radical Civil Service Reform in the United States”, emphasize that the prime objectives of civil service reform in the US exhibit deep significance in the political smoothness and economic prosperity of the nation. Therefore, with the gradual and continuous reforms in the civil services dimension, as the merit based personnel management trend became faded, the economy also had to suffer various mayhems, mostly in the form of socio-political conflicts. As stated by Condrey & Battaglio (2007), the target of civil service reform in the US, since its commencement has been to enhance efficiency in the HRM practices by making the managerial authority much stronger and transparent at the same time. For example, the initiative taken by Brownlow Commission in the year 1937 in introducing an effective management-oriented system in public personnel administration was aimed to deliver greater control to the management concerning personnel management in companies. However, focusing on the recent reforms in the US civil services system and the magnitude of their implementation, Condrey & Battaglio (2007) argued that merit has lost its significance in the context to a substantial extent giving rise to ample skepticism regarding its future stance and non-volatility effectiveness. In this regard, Condrey & Battaglio (2007) demonstrated that the HRM systems prevailing in various institutions of the region ought to be delegated and decentralized for the purpose of bringing them into greater immediate affiliation with the middle along with lower managerial levels rendering the perhaps lost significance to a merit based decision making process. Correspondingly, Condrey & Battaglio (2007) criticizes the currently applied ‘radical civil service reform’ in the doctrine of New Public Management (NPM) as a direct reaction towards the prescriptions of administrative reforms that frame government in the form of bureaucratized systems of civil services. As a consequence, lack of governmental control and regulatory precision of the measures needed to be taken in personnel selection and growth planning within the HRM process has generated various faults in the entire civil services system. As argued in Condrey & Battaglio (2007), the ‘radical civil service’ reformers generally opt towards making the employees “at will”, which represents serving without the assurance of a fixed tenure or job safety protections, rather than modernizing bureaucratized systems of civil service along with their myriad procedures and policies. Accordingly, the increased level of using conditional or “nonstandard work arrangements” has eventually diminished the idea of full-time or career-based employment trend upon which, the conventional civil service systems was originally based, further diminishing employee morale, personnel efficiency and the overall socio-political and economic efficacies of the system in the nation (Condrey & Battaglio, 2007). “Building Bridges over Troubled Waters: Merit as a Guide” Although Ingraham (2006) agrees with the idea that merit has been considered a fundamental facet of the modern civil services system and that its significance have been recently overpowered by the rapid reformative trends in the dimension, the main focus on the articles has been delivered to argue on the thematic and legislative as well as economic applicability of a meritocratic civil services system. Ingraham (2006) thus argues that with the gradual changes observed in the modern world of services society, performance has evolved as a key point of differentiation between efficient and non-efficient dimensions of the system. Taking example of the Pendleton Act, Ingraham (2006) postulated that it was the Congress who passed the Act, with a purpose of restoring professional competence towards the development of federal services in the nation. The Act operates on three major provisions. These provisions encompass admission to federal service, which is to be based upon competitive along with open testing, prohibition of firing personnel for any particular reason other than cause and preserving that no coercion or political pressure is exerted upon the federal personnel for making contributions or performing specific activities. According to Ingraham (2006), merit does not only possess the indispensable skills along with the capabilities to fill the job in question, but it also acts as a ‘public service character’. This represents a desire to perform any activity, not for individual self-interest, but for a greater good. Thus, Ingraham (2006) revealed that merit is mainly associated with ideals, ethics along with values, which determines the appropriate role of civil services in democracy and also in governance within a specific democratic society. It is in this context that Ingraham (2006) criticizes the significance of merit in the modern reforms implemented in the civil services system. As argued in Ingraham (2006), objectives of personnel management system in the civil services dimension of the US have changed in the recent modern phenomenon, where it has become gradually more apparent that for the government, intensification of political environment within this dimension is the chief objective. This can further be advocated on the basis of strategic submissions associated with public services that express the directorial apparatus of government management (Ingraham, 2006). Comparative analysis of the articles: Socio-political implications of the inferences drawn and their reliability The call for an effectual “radical civil service reform”, in order to enhance governmental performance, develop civil services along with their transformation towards better management and decentralization of personnel functions can be duly considered as one of the major strengths of Condrey & Battaglio (2007). Maintaining an adequate level of comprehensibility in its arguments, Condrey & Battaglio (2007) demonstrated the aim of the civil services reform since its commencement, which includes enhancing efficiency and empowering managerial authority as the prime focus. A critical review of Condrey & Battaglio (2007) further advocated that the employment interrelations are incessantly being evolved in the US labor force that has somewhat diminished the importance of merit in the applied reforms, emphasizing political idealism within the context to a large extent. As apparent, synchronization in the flow of information along with valuing both the favoring and opposing viewpoints to the theme, adds to the overall strength of the article by Condrey & Battaglio (2007). However, certain weaknesses can also be apparently observed as persisting in Condrey & Battaglio (2007). Arguably, the points highlighted in Condrey & Battaglio (2007) had been based on a narrow paradigm of researches concerning the role of merit and meritorious services in the civil service systems of the US. This could be regarded as one of the crucial weaknesses of this article with respect to data reliability and dependency. Furthermore, Condrey & Battaglio (2007) rendered maximum focus on demonstrating an in-depth knowledge of the meritocratic civil services system, by criticizing the ‘radical civil service reform’ on the grounds of past lessons, rather than taking into concern the recent developments made in enhancing the aforesaid aspect (Condrey & Battaglio, 2007). Unlike Condrey & Battaglio (2007), Ingraham (2006) emphasized portrayal of the significance of recent reforms being made in the civil services system of the nation along with its provisions, which signified that the federal works ought to be rearranged in the form of hierarchical classes that would further be replicated through the appointment along with promotion of the personnel in a more efficient way. Correspondingly, much stress has been provided in Ingraham (2006), to postulate the need for change in the recent civil services system and the importance of the reforms made thereon relating the early civil services system with the recent dimension of public services. From a critical point of view, although the article replicates the modern vision of personnel management and reformative needs in the civil services system of the nation indicating its one of the major strengths, Ingraham (2006) notably fails to exhibit due focus and comprehensibility of its main points. Additionally, arguments in Ingraham (2006) have been much focused on idealizing the applied reforms with reference to the Pendleton Act, rewarding a one-sided notion to the context that can be regarded as a major weakness in Ingraham (2006). Ingraham (2006) also remained focused only upon the aforementioned aspect rather than emphasizing the impact of merit upon the advancement of civil service reform. This could be denoted as one of the foremost weaknesses of this article in comparison to Condrey & Battaglio (2007) (Ingraham, 2006). Nonetheless, one of the similarities in the approaches taken by Condrey & Battaglio (2007) and Ingraham (2006) had been focused on a similar subject matter i.e. the association of merit with the US civil service systems in the recent phenomenon. As the system imposes considerable impact upon American society and public administration at large, the topic of concern in this context can be argued as quite valuable. Another similarity, which can be viewed in the approaches taken by the authors in their respective articles is taking due consideration of the past lessons while determining the relevant aspects of the aforesaid subject matter. On the contrary, unlike Condrey & Battaglio (2007), Ingraham (2006) adopted the approach of reviewing the Pendleton Act with an intention, though vague, to imply the social and political impression of the reformed system in lieu of the merit based idealism when determining the role of the civil service systems in the contemporary American society. On the other hand, Condrey & Battaglio (2007) had taken the approach of assessing ‘radical civil service reform’ in developing the civil service protections of the US from a broader perspective. Besides, Ingraham (2006) had also taken the approach of rethinking the theoretical foundations of public administration in order to identify the systems characteristics that are typically designed for fostering merit in civil services. Conversely, Condrey & Battaglio (2007) had taken the approach of linking the reforms of civil services with performance for the purpose of enhancing governmental performance, especially in shaping a better management framework in developing civil service protections (Condrey & Battaglio, 2007; Ingraham, 2006). Summative major lessons obtainable from the articles According to Condrey & Battaglio (2007), the aspect of “radical civil service reform” plays an imperative role in enhancing governmental performance towards developing the protections of civil service system. This particular facet of “radical civil service reform” eventually develops the prospect of the civil service systems in future. One of the major lessons learned with reference to Condrey & Battaglio (2007) and Ingraham (2006), from the exercise that have relevance to the future of merit along with the civil service system is that the notion of “radical civil service reform” modernize the systems related with civil service along with their myriad policies. In Condrey & Battaglio (2007), the reformers have been criticized to be making the employment terms based on the principle of working “at will”, which signifies serving the organization without the assurance of job security or tenure protections, thus demanding an unrealistic aim of increased morale among the employees. It is worth mentioning in this regard that the ancient American ‘employment at will” doctrine, which had been eroded during the twentieth century, has become revitalized and since then has been spread to public along with private sectors in the US, through the development of civil service reforms. Contextually, it can be affirmed that this particular factor has relevance to the future of the civil service system (Condrey & Battaglio, 2007). In relation to the above context, the relevance to the future, especially of merit can be determined with reference to Ingraham (2006). According to Ingraham (2006), it can be apparently observed that there pertains a strong interrelation between the perceptions of merit and the civil service system. This can be justified with reference to the fact that on behalf of the government, merit along with meritorious service is duly regarded as the prime target of the civil service reform. Thus, one of the major lessons learned from the exercise that has relevance to the future of merit is that it tends to perform activities not only for individual self-interest but also for a broader good as argued in Ingraham (2006). Moreover, it can also be learned from the exercise that the civil services in this present day context have undergone with several changes that further had augmented in their respective sizes along with scopes, raising the intricacy of the tasks assumed at large. Hence, it can be affirmed in this similar concern that the core facets of merit that encompass non-existence of political favoritism, competences and qualifications among others would lessen the complexities of the tasks assumed by a certain degree. This major fact also represents having greater relevance to the future of merit in upcoming years. As mentioned in the Ingraham (2006), the worldwide setting, wherein the federal service of the US operates demand upon developing various merit dimensions, this development would certainly form a competent along with a well-qualified federal workforce in the US (Ingraham, 2006). Conclusion From the above analysis, it can be affirmed from a broader understanding that the significant aspects of merit and the civil service system are interrelated with each other. This might be owing to the reason that the development of diverse merit dimensions would certainly form a talented, well-qualified along with responsive workforce, able to respond well towards speedily transforming business conditions observed in the contemporary US society. With reference to Condrey & Battaglio (2007) and Ingraham (2006), it can be apparently observed that the employment interrelations have been continued to evolve particularly in the US workforce during the recent years. In this regard, the gaining momentum towards the usage of contingent work arrangements has raised the significance of flexible work structures and most vitally, lessened the idea of full-time career based employment upon which, the conventional systems of civil service were originally based. Thus, it can be concluded that the lessons, which have been obtained from the above analysis have deep relevance towards the future of merit along with the civil service system. References Condrey, S. E., & Battaglio, R. P. (2007). A return to spoils? Revisiting radical civil service reform in the United States. Public Administration Review 67(3): 425-436. Ingraham, P. W. (2006). Building bridges over troubled waters: merit as a guide. Public Administration Review 66(4): 486-495. Read More