Question

Assertion and Reason (A/R)
Assertion (A): Herbert Simon argued that administrative principles are often contradictory, existing in plausible pairs.
Reason (R): This contradiction implies that administrative theories are inherently flawed because they lack universal, empirically verifiable laws.

Which is correct?

• A. Both A and R are true, and R is the correct explanation of A.
• B. Both A and R are true, but R is NOT the correct explanation of A.
• C. A is true, but R is false.
• D. A is false, but R is true.

Answer 1

Answer:

B. Both A and R are true, but R is NOT the correct explanation of A.

Herbert Simon's Critique of Administrative Principles

• Assertion (A): Herbert Simon, a Nobel laureate and influential figure in public administration and cognitive psychology, contended that traditional administrative principles, often presented as universally applicable truths, are in reality contradictory. He famously illustrated this by citing pairs of principles that seem to oppose each other, such as 'a clear chain of command is essential' versus 'specialists should be free to consult anyone at all levels'.
• Simon's work, particularly his book Administrative Behavior (1947), challenged the 'principles' championed by earlier scholars like Frederick Winslow Taylor (Scientific Management) and Henri Fayol (Administrative Theory).
• He argued that these principles often exist in plausible pairs, meaning for every principle advocating a certain course of action, there is often another principle supporting an opposite approach.
• Reason (R): Simon's observation about contradictory principles suggests that administrative theories, as they stood, were not based on rigorous, scientific laws. He believed that for a field to be truly scientific, it must develop universal, empirically verifiable laws, similar to the natural sciences.
• The inherent contradictions meant that administrative principles lacked the precision and predictive power of scientific laws. They were more like proverbs or maxims that could be applied situationally, but not as dependable guides in all circumstances.
• Therefore, the contradiction (as stated in A) implies that administrative theories were, in Simon's view, inherently flawed because they failed to meet the standard of universal, empirically verifiable laws, and thus R is a correct statement about the implication of A.
• However, the question asks if R is the *correct explanation* of A. While R elaborates on the *implications* of A, the core reason Simon identified the contradictions was not solely because he sought universal laws, but because he observed the practical application and inherent ambiguities within existing administrative doctrines. The lack of universal laws is an outcome and a critique stemming from the observation of contradictions, rather than the sole cause of identifying them.
• Simon advocated for a more behaviorally oriented approach to administration, focusing on decision-making processes within organizations, which he termed 'bounded rationality'. This concept suggests that individuals make decisions rationally, but only within the limits of the information they have, their cognitive limitations, and the time available.