南京工业大学学报:社会科学版
南京工業大學學報:社會科學版
남경공업대학학보:사회과학판
Journal of Nanjing University of Technology(Social Science Edition)
2012年
2期
85-93
,共9页
行政服从%现代性%后现代性%公共性%解释视角
行政服從%現代性%後現代性%公共性%解釋視角
행정복종%현대성%후현대성%공공성%해석시각
administrative obedience%modern paradigm%postmodern paradigm%public paradigm%interpretation
"命令—服从"机制是现代组织的核心运作机制,这在韦伯的官僚制范型中已经得到了精妙的描述。但在这样的机制下,行政人员常常需要面对一种两难情境,这种情境需要个人去判断那些与个人责任相悖的组织义务的对与错、好与坏以及公正还是不公正。行政服从的困境实质上是行政人员的主观责任和客观责任之间的冲突,公共组织设计面临的基本问题是个人自主与集体理性之间的持续张力。从这两项约束条件出发2,0世纪40年代开始,西方学者们分别站在现代性、后现代性和公共性的立场上对"命令—服从"机制进行了批判,其开出的药方或是补充,或是抛弃,或是修正。这些不同的解决方案体现了他们立足于不同的理解视角创新公共组织形式的努力。对不同立场的批判理论进行梳理,有助于更好地理解行政服从和探讨行政服从的未来命运。
"命令—服從"機製是現代組織的覈心運作機製,這在韋伯的官僚製範型中已經得到瞭精妙的描述。但在這樣的機製下,行政人員常常需要麵對一種兩難情境,這種情境需要箇人去判斷那些與箇人責任相悖的組織義務的對與錯、好與壞以及公正還是不公正。行政服從的睏境實質上是行政人員的主觀責任和客觀責任之間的遲突,公共組織設計麵臨的基本問題是箇人自主與集體理性之間的持續張力。從這兩項約束條件齣髮2,0世紀40年代開始,西方學者們分彆站在現代性、後現代性和公共性的立場上對"命令—服從"機製進行瞭批判,其開齣的藥方或是補充,或是拋棄,或是脩正。這些不同的解決方案體現瞭他們立足于不同的理解視角創新公共組織形式的努力。對不同立場的批判理論進行梳理,有助于更好地理解行政服從和探討行政服從的未來命運。
"명령—복종"궤제시현대조직적핵심운작궤제,저재위백적관료제범형중이경득도료정묘적묘술。단재저양적궤제하,행정인원상상수요면대일충량난정경,저충정경수요개인거판단나사여개인책임상패적조직의무적대여착、호여배이급공정환시불공정。행정복종적곤경실질상시행정인원적주관책임화객관책임지간적충돌,공공조직설계면림적기본문제시개인자주여집체이성지간적지속장력。종저량항약속조건출발2,0세기40년대개시,서방학자문분별참재현대성、후현대성화공공성적립장상대"명령—복종"궤제진행료비판,기개출적약방혹시보충,혹시포기,혹시수정。저사불동적해결방안체현료타문립족우불동적리해시각창신공공조직형식적노력。대불동립장적비판이론진행소리,유조우경호지리해행정복종화탐토행정복종적미래명운。
" Command-obedience" mechanism, as the core of the operating mechanism of been exquisitely described by Weber in its bureaucracy paradigm. However, such mechanism modern society, has often encounters ex- eeutives with a dilemma,in which individuals have to make a judgment on those obligations contrary to personal responsibility. The predicament of administrative obedience is essentially the conflict between subjective responsi- bility and objective responsibility of the executives. The fundamental problems facing public organization is the continuous tension between individual autonomy and collective action. Since 1940s, western scholars have been criticizing" Command-obedience" mechanism in modern, postmodern and public perspectives. They proposed to supplement, to abandon, or to amend. Different solutions show different perspectives of understanding and inno- vations. To sort out the different schools of criticism, we may have a clear picture and explore the future of the administrative obedience.