By definition efficiency is performing or functioning in the best possible manner with the least waste of time and effort. This may not be the only worthy goal of the bureaucracy but it is definitely, in all cases, what we should be aiming for. One common example of the bureaucratic inefficiency is the DMV. The DMV exists to serve the needs of citizens relating to motor vehicles. For them to achieve this goal and perform this service in the best way possible they have to be efficient. In most cases, to achieve the agencies/departments/corporations ‘main goal’ they have to be efficient. Another example of this is the Veterans Affairs. They exist to deal with the issues regarding veterans and things such as what they’re entitled to as compensation for serving. The issue of the backup of requests is a clear example of inefficiency and them not serving their purpose as best as possible. Again, to serve their goal, they have to be efficient. This would define efficiency as the main worthy goal. As for the second half of this statement, I think that yes, some publicly run programs may not be inefficient. This means that they are completing their main goal to the best of their ability. As for those who aren’t efficient, they are not completing their main goal, whatever it may be, making efficiency the main worthy goal.
What solutions can create more efficiency though? Sure privitization can lead to efficiency but shouldn't another main goal be protecting the public good. There are a lot of short cuts taken in private businesses to maximize profits that could be very harmful to the public sector. For example, the veterans that are served by the VA need to pay for their services just like you would pay for the services of a privitized busines and then they aren't given the full extent of help that they need because they can't afford it or because the business cuts corners and doesn't provide all the benefits that are available to that Veteran. On the other hand, agencies that don't deal with public welfare may work better as a business. Only dealing with the side of the DMV that prints your license and so on could benefit from the efficiency of a McDonald's, however, the governement should create the rules and regulations that benefit the public. These privitized sectors should still be held accountable to the government so that the well being of our civilians is the main goal. It's awesome to be effieicnt but if that means hurting people than it shouldn't be the main goal.
I agree with Zach, especially on his example of the DMV. While efficiency should not be the main goal of the bureaucracy , it is definitely important in carrying out their goal. Public service is the most worthy goal of the bureaucracy, but it has to be efficient to do so. Publicly run programs are meant to serve the people and they have a lot of people to serve. It is important to do their job correctly, but they still have to be efficient. However, it is important to remember that it is not a business made for profit. If it was a business (like Amber's McDonald's example) it would be their main concern to get as many costumers in and out as possible. The bureaucracy needs to be efficient but can't only focus on efficiency because then we have people moving in and out of the DMV that weren't tested thoroughly and then the DMV isn't completing its main goal of public service which in this case is keeping people safe. Overall, efficiency is important for the bureaucracy to function, but is far from their main goal.
Efficiency shouldn't be the only worthy goal, but should be a top goal. The most important goal for a government, or any, agency is to be providing their clients fairly and safely. To ensure that this goal is followed it may make things seem to be inefficient when not looking at the entire picture. Zach used the DMV as an example of inefficiency, and may citizens agree that it is very inefficient, but it is inefficient to make sure that everyone there is safe enough to drive on the roads. Although driving is looked at as nothing, the government is giving citizens the power to go on a road, in what could be considered a very dangerous moving vehicle, with hundreds of other innocent citizens. To give someone this power they need to ensure that the person is responsible enough. Since safely is the top goal of governmental businesses they become somewhat inefficient, and everything can be looked at as inefficient, since it runs on someones opinion instead of facts. Although safety shouldn't be an excuse for businesses to be inefficient, it is better to be safe than sorry. Also, since it does take so long a person can trust that the job was at least done right, when at a privatized business where everything is super efficient, a citizen might not, and should not, feel as comfortable getting something as huge as their license in 10 minutes.
I agree very much so with Carrigan. Each part of the bureaucracy should be aiming to complete their specialized task and serve the public. Of course, efficiency is always a plus, but it certainly is not the only worthy goal. Once again, Carrigan makes a very good point of how some level of inefficiency is necessary in order for the government agencies to achieve their main goal. Inefficiency is inevitable and can only be avoided to some point. Amber mentioned the privatization of certain departments. Though this may increase efficiency a little because private companies are motivated by making a profit, there would still be inefficiency. When you go to McDonald's, you are still going to wait in a line, wait to get your food after ordering, and sometimes there may be an issue with a machine so you will have to wait even longer or choose to order something else. Inefficiency can never be completely avoided. As for the second part of the statement that claims "not all publicly run programs are inefficient". I agree with this because the programs are designed to run a specific way in order to ensure that the job at hand gets done well and in a safe manner. One of the pathologies we looked at in class was red-tape which states that the maze of government rules and regulations decreases efficiency. This may be true, but the regulations are set in place for a reason and they are necessary to the department to be effective. Many citizens who complain about the bureaucracy must realize that it is difficult for an agency to do its job effectively and in a timely fashion.
I agree with Cara and Kayla in that efficiency is not the only worthy goal, and rather, the benefit of the consumer should take precedence and be the ultimate goal - efficiency is merely a helpful way to achieve that ultimate goal. To use the example of the DMV, I think efficiency is preferable in a department like that, especially considering the amount of people who deal with it every day, but if something incidental creates inefficiency, the department still must accomplish its goal of protecting the people and must go on as best it can until the cause of inefficiency is handled. However, under everyday circumstances, efficiency should be something bureaucracies work towards, because it will inevitably help them achieve their main goal of protecting the consumer. I think in the examples before me, efficiency was given a bad connotation and was seen as something that could result in things being overlooked. However, Zach's definition clearly displays that being efficient is not a bad thing, and is in fact rather helpful. At the end of the day, though, efficiency should not be the only goal, but instead, something that is worked towards little by little in order to increase the possibility of fully accomplishing the intended goal. As for the second part of the quote, I think that in a way this is true. As stated by a bureaucrat in Democracy in America, every bureaucracy has successes and failures. The failures likely resulted from inefficiency that was not able to be corrected, but just because a department has had inefficiencies does not mean it as a whole is inefficient, as long as these are counteracted by successfully achieving the department's main goal. I think, to use our example, the DMV can sometimes have inefficiencies (long lines, etc..) but as a whole, it is accomplishing what it is meant to and is therefore relatively efficient.
I agree with the statement because efficiency, although desirable, should not be the main or only goal for the bureaucracy. Public service needs to be the main goal for these agencies. Properly implementing policy and executing the guidelines given through legislation is the number one goal. Efficiency is important so that things don't get too backed up, but is not vital because, like Amber's reference, bureaucracy is not like a McDonald's. Things cannot be taken care of so quickly because there are rules that need to be taken into account which help the public as a whole. Therefore, I agree with Amber, Kayla, Carrigan and Lauren in their comments. They agree that the consumer's well being needs to be the ultimate goal. Efficiency can be improved, however, to make things run smoother but it will never be up to par with a privatized business, which is okay and necessary in bureaucracy.
I do agree with the statement. There are parts of the bureaucracy that are efficient. Also, efficiency is not the only worthy goal of the bureaucracy. The main goal of the bureaucracy is to serve the public good. Sometimes in the bureaucracy efficiency is the key to serving the public good. An example of this is FEMA. When they try to rebuild towns after disasters, efficiency and getting everything done correctly is the goal. There are also some cases where efficiency is not really the greatest goal. Look at the DMV. It takes forever to go through thee DMV, however, they are doing their best to make sure everyone that gets their license is getting it correctly. Also, if they don't take as long as they do, they wouldn't be satisfying the impersonality requirement of the bureaucracy. It is in that way that I will disagree slightly with Carrigan, because there are some cases where efficiency should be a top goal, and some cases where efficiency shouldn't be a top goal.
Carrigan worded it rather perfectly actually. I agree that efficiency is not the only worthy goal in the bureaucracy. I think getting the goal done in such a quick time should just be a motivator. Giving the people what they need is the main goal, not getting it done the quickest. If the bureaucracy were all about time, it would always end up as a messy race. By time being a motivator, instead of holding businesses up to a standard, it will allow more attention to be given to each customer. The bureaucracy will be more personable with no time standard always being pushed onto them. Just like Carrigan had said the DMV may take a little longer than people would like, but it is for a reason. You should not rush something that involves safety. Take me as an example. Thank God, getting your license takes longer than people would like. If it were not for their method of going through a certain standard procedure, I would be danger to many people. I also agree that not all publicly run programs are inefficient. Some programs use time to their advantage. Maybe one program's job is simpler and can use time to make their customers feel safer or happier with the service. Just because something may take longer, it certainly does not mean it is waisting time in the process.
I really like Zach’s example and think that the DMV is the epitome of inefficiency. In this case, although it is not preferred and wastes time and money, the effects that the inefficiency has don’t impact people to the extent that having an inefficient Department of Homeland Security or like in the Daily Show examples, the Veterans Affairs. These bureaucracies have a serious impact on citizens. If these departments don’t work efficiently that means that the government can get attacked or in the Veterans Affairs case, thousands of veterans aren’t getting the benefits they were promised. This affects their lives, our lives and can also effect many decisions down the road like if someone even wants to serve our country because of that reason. In these cases it doesn’t come down to just wasting time and being a pain, like the DMV but instead actually influencing people’s incomes or our safety. In those cases, efficiency needs to be the goal in order to accomplish the department’s goal as a whole whether it is safety, benefits or anything else. Additionally, all publically run programs are not inefficient but all of them can be improved upon, some more than others.
Its true the it is unfortunate that the veterans do not get their benefits quickly and it would be much better for the VA to be more organized and use computers. However, i disagree with the idea that this should be the only goal. As Lauren and several others said, although inefficiency is inconvenient to the people trying to gain benefits or get things done through the DMV, if efficiency were the only goal it could negatively impact these people rather than positively as they may think. Going back to the DMV, as many others have, and a point of Amber's, if the DMV were too efficient and privatized the efficiency may cause those who should not be allowed a license to be on the roads. Thus causing the DMV to make a profit while the roads are made unsafe. I realize this example has been used quite a bit, but it's a good one. Would you really want someone who is just trying to make good money to be taking care of handling your benefits and important documents?
I agree with Kayla that inefficiency is inevitable and bureaucratic departments take so long in order to ensure safety and avoid problems. Efficiency is not the only worthy goal of a bureaucracy; it'd be ideal for things to get done quicker but fast doesn't always mean the best. A really corny example is when someone hands in their test first, sure the test is completed but the student who spends more time looking over their test and being cautious is going to catch mistakes they've made rather than the student who rushed to be done. It's McDonald's job to be fast because they're a company with the goal to profit; bureaucracies are not focused on making money so they should not function like a corporation whose only intention is to maximize their capital. Also, look at the quality of McDonald's foods. The nutrition and cleanliness of the product is jeopardized in order to be time efficient. Waiting in long lines is a small price to pay when safety and quality are ensured. I also agree that not all publicly run programs are inefficient. Personally, I believe for a department or program to be inefficient, it would mean that it is unable to complete their given task, and that's not true about all public run programs. The programs are not fast but they are adequate enough to achieve their purpose and produce the intended result, such as a driver's license. There are many flaws with the bureaucracy, I'm not even going to begin to talk about the VA and its backlog, but departments, such as the DMV, do get their job done.
I believe that many parts of the bureaucracy are indeed inefficient. I don't think that that should be the top priority anyways. Trying to fix inefficiency may exactly do the opposite of what was intended. Almost if not every year year the VA has gotten more budget money while other departments had budget cuts. During that time, the number of veterans claims just waiting on a piece of paper skyrocketed to more than 2000% of what it originally was. The VA was given more funding but it is not clear where that money was actually put in to. The DMV is another good example. The DMV doesn't have to be efficient. Their goal is to get people driving, not to get them driving quickly. This place works like a rusty machine in the sense that you must have everything to proceed to the next place, but it will go slowly. I don't think the DMV should be focused too hard on fixing their efficiency right now.The government right now should strive for efficiency, but it shouldn't be their number one goal.
I agree that efficiency is not the only goal of government programs because not all the parts of the bureaucracy are going to be able to get things done quickly. Like Joe said, the DMV has only one goal and that is to get people on the road driving and taking care of other motor vehicle problems. The can care less how quick and nice they are because that isn't their main job and goal. Inefficiency isn't the only problem as well. However places will be inefficient to get the final goal reached. Many people have brought up the example of McDonald's and I agree with Kayla in the fact that McDonalds may be more efficient than the DMV but you still need to wait in line, wait for the food, and if there is a mistake in the order then you need to wait for that to be solved as well. Therefore, efficiency is not the only goal but sometimes inefficiency could be a benchmark to reach to get the final product achieved.
I agree with Kayla's statement about how the main goal of the bureaucracy should be to complete the tasks given, and also that efficiency is a plus. However, efficiency shouldn't be the only worthy goal. Using the DMV example again, sure the system is certainly not as efficient as it should be but at the same time, it ultimately gets the job done. If the biggest end goal, however is to make to public happy and safe, efficiency should definitely be held to a higher standard. I know personally that people usually don't go into the DMV with a smile. It always ends up being a prolonged, ridiculous process. However, if you look at, again, McDonald's (which is much more efficient), people usually don't mind going in and getting a meal because it is generally not painful. So concluding, yes, efficiency should not be the only worthy goal in a public program, but when the ultimate goal is for high public satisfaction, it definitely should be taken more into consideration.
I agree with Bailey, that as long as the the departments of the bureaucracy gets their jobs done in a timely manner unless they absolutely need to get things done efficiently and swiftly. An example of a department that needs to get things done efficiently and swiftly would be FEMA. If there is a hurricane, tornado, etc., they need to be at the site of the natural disaster immediately and they need to be quick in the rebuilding process, like with Hurricane Katrina. An example where they don't necessarily need to quick is the DMV. This is not a business, they won't necessarily lose business if they are not efficient, like at Burger King, they will lose customers if they are slow, so that is why they are quick and efficient and you can get dinner in five minutes. The government doesn't need to be fast, they just need to get things done. It is not essential that someone would get their license in ten minutes or three hours. As long you get the license in somewhat a timely manner, then they have done their job, if they get it done in ten minutes, then that is a plus. Effiency is not the key in some instances, but if it is necessary it should be the main goal, but if time is not of the essence, it should not be the main goal of the department.
Generally so far everyone seems to put efficiency high on the list of goals for the bureaucracy, I would argue that rules and a clear hierarchy of structure and power are more important than efficiency. Clear rules allow the bureaucracy to be impersonal because it forces the bureaucracy to deal with every person the same way. Some would say there are too many rules which cause inefficiency. This is not the case because imagine going to the DMV and actually having all the proper documentation in addition to being in the right line. You won't have an issue. The problem is that the rules are not clear enough to the public. The public in turn clogs the machine. The hierarchical structure allows for a set directive and the creation of rules that the bureaucracy will run by. Clear leadership allows creates more clear accountability and less scapegoating. To the other point, it is obvious that all bureaucratic agencies aren't inefficient. The NSA is a prime example of this
I would have to partially disagree with you on your statement Ethan. Although the rules and hierarchical structure may be important in making sure a bureaucracy is being run by the best and most qualified, surely it isn't more important than making sure that this system is working at its best. If our bureaucracy would prove to be inefficient then most of these public services would not be done properly and there would be so much room for error and discontent from the people who are not recieving their desired needs. Also inefficiency plays into a lot of other factors that create bureaucratic pathologies like red tape and waste.
I have a mixed opinion on efficiency in government. The term efficiency in business can be exchanged with profit. However in the government sense it means giving the public's good as fast and practical as possible. One example of an organization that needs to be efficient is FEMA and so it is organized to do so, for FEMA efficiency is a primary goal in terms of responding to a disaster and assessing/ assisting in damage clean up. This agrees with the second part of the question where not all programs are inefficient. Accountability plays toward this as if FEMA were to be drastically inefficient there would be political changes and swift reform. In business inefficiency leads to loss in market share, and a loss of profits with a potential of bankruptcy. The government cannot go bankrupt, (close it's doors for good wise) as they supply public good such as schools and police and an army. However a huge argument against this question is the VA and we are slowly seeing a response to public disappointment with the VA as the head of the VA was fired recently, as well as a new online program for claims. This is a result of public oversight, and holding someone accountable. This is arguably efficiency, as it is a response to poor service. In a way the free market nature of the united states and our ability to hold those accountable acts like a loss in market share, however instead of shutting down the bureaucracy there is reform, because unllike buisness there are no other competitors to the VA and the good provided is safe to say unprofitable and needs to have the cost spread throughout the population.
I agree with Bailey, that the bureaucracy's purpose is to get things done for the public and efficiency is just an added bonus if they can. Efficiency shouldn't be the ultimate goal of the bureaucracy though. For example, the DMV isn't efficient at all, yet they get their jobs done and that is the main goal for them. The DMV won't lose customers if they are inefficient because people have to go there to get their licenses, so they aren't worried about pleasing you with timing. Even though efficiency isn't a top priority for the government at the moment, it should definitely be something they should start working on for the future.
Just because something is doe fast doesn't mean that it is done the best way possible and even if it takes the DMV awhile to achieve their tasks they are still getting all the tasks done and there is no other places to go. the people need the DMV more than the DMV needs them. On the other hand if the DMV for example was faster maybe opinions of the government would be better and people would actually wasnt to work for the government if they were faster.
Just because something is doe fast doesn't mean that it is done the best way possible and even if it takes the DMV awhile to achieve their tasks they are still getting all the tasks done and there is no other places to go. the people need the DMV more than the DMV needs them. On the other hand if the DMV for example was faster maybe opinions of the government would be better and people would actually wasnt to work for the government if they were faster.
By definition efficiency is performing or functioning in the best possible manner with the least waste of time and effort. This may not be the only worthy goal of the bureaucracy but it is definitely, in all cases, what we should be aiming for. One common example of the bureaucratic inefficiency is the DMV. The DMV exists to serve the needs of citizens relating to motor vehicles. For them to achieve this goal and perform this service in the best way possible they have to be efficient. In most cases, to achieve the agencies/departments/corporations ‘main goal’ they have to be efficient. Another example of this is the Veterans Affairs. They exist to deal with the issues regarding veterans and things such as what they’re entitled to as compensation for serving. The issue of the backup of requests is a clear example of inefficiency and them not serving their purpose as best as possible. Again, to serve their goal, they have to be efficient. This would define efficiency as the main worthy goal. As for the second half of this statement, I think that yes, some publicly run programs may not be inefficient. This means that they are completing their main goal to the best of their ability. As for those who aren’t efficient, they are not completing their main goal, whatever it may be, making efficiency the main worthy goal.
ReplyDeleteWhat solutions can create more efficiency though? Sure privitization can lead to efficiency but shouldn't another main goal be protecting the public good. There are a lot of short cuts taken in private businesses to maximize profits that could be very harmful to the public sector. For example, the veterans that are served by the VA need to pay for their services just like you would pay for the services of a privitized busines and then they aren't given the full extent of help that they need because they can't afford it or because the business cuts corners and doesn't provide all the benefits that are available to that Veteran. On the other hand, agencies that don't deal with public welfare may work better as a business. Only dealing with the side of the DMV that prints your license and so on could benefit from the efficiency of a McDonald's, however, the governement should create the rules and regulations that benefit the public. These privitized sectors should still be held accountable to the government so that the well being of our civilians is the main goal. It's awesome to be effieicnt but if that means hurting people than it shouldn't be the main goal.
DeleteI agree with Zach, especially on his example of the DMV. While efficiency should not be the main goal of the bureaucracy , it is definitely important in carrying out their goal. Public service is the most worthy goal of the bureaucracy, but it has to be efficient to do so. Publicly run programs are meant to serve the people and they have a lot of people to serve. It is important to do their job correctly, but they still have to be efficient. However, it is important to remember that it is not a business made for profit. If it was a business (like Amber's McDonald's example) it would be their main concern to get as many costumers in and out as possible. The bureaucracy needs to be efficient but can't only focus on efficiency because then we have people moving in and out of the DMV that weren't tested thoroughly and then the DMV isn't completing its main goal of public service which in this case is keeping people safe. Overall, efficiency is important for the bureaucracy to function, but is far from their main goal.
DeleteEfficiency shouldn't be the only worthy goal, but should be a top goal. The most important goal for a government, or any, agency is to be providing their clients fairly and safely. To ensure that this goal is followed it may make things seem to be inefficient when not looking at the entire picture. Zach used the DMV as an example of inefficiency, and may citizens agree that it is very inefficient, but it is inefficient to make sure that everyone there is safe enough to drive on the roads. Although driving is looked at as nothing, the government is giving citizens the power to go on a road, in what could be considered a very dangerous moving vehicle, with hundreds of other innocent citizens. To give someone this power they need to ensure that the person is responsible enough. Since safely is the top goal of governmental businesses they become somewhat inefficient, and everything can be looked at as inefficient, since it runs on someones opinion instead of facts. Although safety shouldn't be an excuse for businesses to be inefficient, it is better to be safe than sorry. Also, since it does take so long a person can trust that the job was at least done right, when at a privatized business where everything is super efficient, a citizen might not, and should not, feel as comfortable getting something as huge as their license in 10 minutes.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI agree very much so with Carrigan. Each part of the bureaucracy should be aiming to complete their specialized task and serve the public. Of course, efficiency is always a plus, but it certainly is not the only worthy goal. Once again, Carrigan makes a very good point of how some level of inefficiency is necessary in order for the government agencies to achieve their main goal. Inefficiency is inevitable and can only be avoided to some point. Amber mentioned the privatization of certain departments. Though this may increase efficiency a little because private companies are motivated by making a profit, there would still be inefficiency. When you go to McDonald's, you are still going to wait in a line, wait to get your food after ordering, and sometimes there may be an issue with a machine so you will have to wait even longer or choose to order something else. Inefficiency can never be completely avoided. As for the second part of the statement that claims "not all publicly run programs are inefficient". I agree with this because the programs are designed to run a specific way in order to ensure that the job at hand gets done well and in a safe manner. One of the pathologies we looked at in class was red-tape which states that the maze of government rules and regulations decreases efficiency. This may be true, but the regulations are set in place for a reason and they are necessary to the department to be effective. Many citizens who complain about the bureaucracy must realize that it is difficult for an agency to do its job effectively and in a timely fashion.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Cara and Kayla in that efficiency is not the only worthy goal, and rather, the benefit of the consumer should take precedence and be the ultimate goal - efficiency is merely a helpful way to achieve that ultimate goal. To use the example of the DMV, I think efficiency is preferable in a department like that, especially considering the amount of people who deal with it every day, but if something incidental creates inefficiency, the department still must accomplish its goal of protecting the people and must go on as best it can until the cause of inefficiency is handled. However, under everyday circumstances, efficiency should be something bureaucracies work towards, because it will inevitably help them achieve their main goal of protecting the consumer. I think in the examples before me, efficiency was given a bad connotation and was seen as something that could result in things being overlooked. However, Zach's definition clearly displays that being efficient is not a bad thing, and is in fact rather helpful. At the end of the day, though, efficiency should not be the only goal, but instead, something that is worked towards little by little in order to increase the possibility of fully accomplishing the intended goal.
ReplyDeleteAs for the second part of the quote, I think that in a way this is true. As stated by a bureaucrat in Democracy in America, every bureaucracy has successes and failures. The failures likely resulted from inefficiency that was not able to be corrected, but just because a department has had inefficiencies does not mean it as a whole is inefficient, as long as these are counteracted by successfully achieving the department's main goal. I think, to use our example, the DMV can sometimes have inefficiencies (long lines, etc..) but as a whole, it is accomplishing what it is meant to and is therefore relatively efficient.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the statement because efficiency, although desirable, should not be the main or only goal for the bureaucracy. Public service needs to be the main goal for these agencies. Properly implementing policy and executing the guidelines given through legislation is the number one goal. Efficiency is important so that things don't get too backed up, but is not vital because, like Amber's reference, bureaucracy is not like a McDonald's. Things cannot be taken care of so quickly because there are rules that need to be taken into account which help the public as a whole. Therefore, I agree with Amber, Kayla, Carrigan and Lauren in their comments. They agree that the consumer's well being needs to be the ultimate goal. Efficiency can be improved, however, to make things run smoother but it will never be up to par with a privatized business, which is okay and necessary in bureaucracy.
ReplyDeleteI do agree with the statement. There are parts of the bureaucracy that are efficient. Also, efficiency is not the only worthy goal of the bureaucracy. The main goal of the bureaucracy is to serve the public good. Sometimes in the bureaucracy efficiency is the key to serving the public good. An example of this is FEMA. When they try to rebuild towns after disasters, efficiency and getting everything done correctly is the goal. There are also some cases where efficiency is not really the greatest goal. Look at the DMV. It takes forever to go through thee DMV, however, they are doing their best to make sure everyone that gets their license is getting it correctly. Also, if they don't take as long as they do, they wouldn't be satisfying the impersonality requirement of the bureaucracy. It is in that way that I will disagree slightly with Carrigan, because there are some cases where efficiency should be a top goal, and some cases where efficiency shouldn't be a top goal.
ReplyDeleteCarrigan worded it rather perfectly actually. I agree that efficiency is not the only worthy goal in the bureaucracy. I think getting the goal done in such a quick time should just be a motivator. Giving the people what they need is the main goal, not getting it done the quickest. If the bureaucracy were all about time, it would always end up as a messy race. By time being a motivator, instead of holding businesses up to a standard, it will allow more attention to be given to each customer. The bureaucracy will be more personable with no time standard always being pushed onto them. Just like Carrigan had said the DMV may take a little longer than people would like, but it is for a reason. You should not rush something that involves safety. Take me as an example. Thank God, getting your license takes longer than people would like. If it were not for their method of going through a certain standard procedure, I would be danger to many people. I also agree that not all publicly run programs are inefficient. Some programs use time to their advantage. Maybe one program's job is simpler and can use time to make their customers feel safer or happier with the service. Just because something may take longer, it certainly does not mean it is waisting time in the process.
ReplyDeleteI really like Zach’s example and think that the DMV is the epitome of inefficiency. In this case, although it is not preferred and wastes time and money, the effects that the inefficiency has don’t impact people to the extent that having an inefficient Department of Homeland Security or like in the Daily Show examples, the Veterans Affairs. These bureaucracies have a serious impact on citizens. If these departments don’t work efficiently that means that the government can get attacked or in the Veterans Affairs case, thousands of veterans aren’t getting the benefits they were promised. This affects their lives, our lives and can also effect many decisions down the road like if someone even wants to serve our country because of that reason. In these cases it doesn’t come down to just wasting time and being a pain, like the DMV but instead actually influencing people’s incomes or our safety. In those cases, efficiency needs to be the goal in order to accomplish the department’s goal as a whole whether it is safety, benefits or anything else. Additionally, all publically run programs are not inefficient but all of them can be improved upon, some more than others.
ReplyDeleteIts true the it is unfortunate that the veterans do not get their benefits quickly and it would be much better for the VA to be more organized and use computers. However, i disagree with the idea that this should be the only goal. As Lauren and several others said, although inefficiency is inconvenient to the people trying to gain benefits or get things done through the DMV, if efficiency were the only goal it could negatively impact these people rather than positively as they may think. Going back to the DMV, as many others have, and a point of Amber's, if the DMV were too efficient and privatized the efficiency may cause those who should not be allowed a license to be on the roads. Thus causing the DMV to make a profit while the roads are made unsafe. I realize this example has been used quite a bit, but it's a good one. Would you really want someone who is just trying to make good money to be taking care of handling your benefits and important documents?
DeleteI agree with Kayla that inefficiency is inevitable and bureaucratic departments take so long in order to ensure safety and avoid problems. Efficiency is not the only worthy goal of a bureaucracy; it'd be ideal for things to get done quicker but fast doesn't always mean the best. A really corny example is when someone hands in their test first, sure the test is completed but the student who spends more time looking over their test and being cautious is going to catch mistakes they've made rather than the student who rushed to be done. It's McDonald's job to be fast because they're a company with the goal to profit; bureaucracies are not focused on making money so they should not function like a corporation whose only intention is to maximize their capital. Also, look at the quality of McDonald's foods. The nutrition and cleanliness of the product is jeopardized in order to be time efficient. Waiting in long lines is a small price to pay when safety and quality are ensured. I also agree that not all publicly run programs are inefficient. Personally, I believe for a department or program to be inefficient, it would mean that it is unable to complete their given task, and that's not true about all public run programs. The programs are not fast but they are adequate enough to achieve their purpose and produce the intended result, such as a driver's license. There are many flaws with the bureaucracy, I'm not even going to begin to talk about the VA and its backlog, but departments, such as the DMV, do get their job done.
ReplyDeleteI believe that many parts of the bureaucracy are indeed inefficient. I don't think that that should be the top priority anyways. Trying to fix inefficiency may exactly do the opposite of what was intended. Almost if not every year year the VA has gotten more budget money while other departments had budget cuts. During that time, the number of veterans claims just waiting on a piece of paper skyrocketed to more than 2000% of what it originally was. The VA was given more funding but it is not clear where that money was actually put in to. The DMV is another good example. The DMV doesn't have to be efficient. Their goal is to get people driving, not to get them driving quickly. This place works like a rusty machine in the sense that you must have everything to proceed to the next place, but it will go slowly. I don't think the DMV should be focused too hard on fixing their efficiency right now.The government right now should strive for efficiency, but it shouldn't be their number one goal.
ReplyDeleteI agree that efficiency is not the only goal of government programs because not all the parts of the bureaucracy are going to be able to get things done quickly. Like Joe said, the DMV has only one goal and that is to get people on the road driving and taking care of other motor vehicle problems. The can care less how quick and nice they are because that isn't their main job and goal. Inefficiency isn't the only problem as well. However places will be inefficient to get the final goal reached. Many people have brought up the example of McDonald's and I agree with Kayla in the fact that McDonalds may be more efficient than the DMV but you still need to wait in line, wait for the food, and if there is a mistake in the order then you need to wait for that to be solved as well. Therefore, efficiency is not the only goal but sometimes inefficiency could be a benchmark to reach to get the final product achieved.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Kayla's statement about how the main goal of the bureaucracy should be to complete the tasks given, and also that efficiency is a plus. However, efficiency shouldn't be the only worthy goal. Using the DMV example again, sure the system is certainly not as efficient as it should be but at the same time, it ultimately gets the job done. If the biggest end goal, however is to make to public happy and safe, efficiency should definitely be held to a higher standard. I know personally that people usually don't go into the DMV with a smile. It always ends up being a prolonged, ridiculous process. However, if you look at, again, McDonald's (which is much more efficient), people usually don't mind going in and getting a meal because it is generally not painful. So concluding, yes, efficiency should not be the only worthy goal in a public program, but when the ultimate goal is for high public satisfaction, it definitely should be taken more into consideration.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Bailey, that as long as the the departments of the bureaucracy gets their jobs done in a timely manner unless they absolutely need to get things done efficiently and swiftly. An example of a department that needs to get things done efficiently and swiftly would be FEMA. If there is a hurricane, tornado, etc., they need to be at the site of the natural disaster immediately and they need to be quick in the rebuilding process, like with Hurricane Katrina. An example where they don't necessarily need to quick is the DMV. This is not a business, they won't necessarily lose business if they are not efficient, like at Burger King, they will lose customers if they are slow, so that is why they are quick and efficient and you can get dinner in five minutes. The government doesn't need to be fast, they just need to get things done. It is not essential that someone would get their license in ten minutes or three hours. As long you get the license in somewhat a timely manner, then they have done their job, if they get it done in ten minutes, then that is a plus. Effiency is not the key in some instances, but if it is necessary it should be the main goal, but if time is not of the essence, it should not be the main goal of the department.
ReplyDeleteGenerally so far everyone seems to put efficiency high on the list of goals for the bureaucracy, I would argue that rules and a clear hierarchy of structure and power are more important than efficiency. Clear rules allow the bureaucracy to be impersonal because it forces the bureaucracy to deal with every person the same way. Some would say there are too many rules which cause inefficiency. This is not the case because imagine going to the DMV and actually having all the proper documentation in addition to being in the right line. You won't have an issue. The problem is that the rules are not clear enough to the public. The public in turn clogs the machine. The hierarchical structure allows for a set directive and the creation of rules that the bureaucracy will run by. Clear leadership allows creates more clear accountability and less scapegoating. To the other point, it is obvious that all bureaucratic agencies aren't inefficient. The NSA is a prime example of this
ReplyDeleteI would have to partially disagree with you on your statement Ethan. Although the rules and hierarchical structure may be important in making sure a bureaucracy is being run by the best and most qualified, surely it isn't more important than making sure that this system is working at its best. If our bureaucracy would prove to be inefficient then most of these public services would not be done properly and there would be so much room for error and discontent from the people who are not recieving their desired needs. Also inefficiency plays into a lot of other factors that create bureaucratic pathologies like red tape and waste.
DeleteI have a mixed opinion on efficiency in government. The term efficiency in business can be exchanged with profit. However in the government sense it means giving the public's good as fast and practical as possible. One example of an organization that needs to be efficient is FEMA and so it is organized to do so, for FEMA efficiency is a primary goal in terms of responding to a disaster and assessing/ assisting in damage clean up. This agrees with the second part of the question where not all programs are inefficient. Accountability plays toward this as if FEMA were to be drastically inefficient there would be political changes and swift reform. In business inefficiency leads to loss in market share, and a loss of profits with a potential of bankruptcy. The government cannot go bankrupt, (close it's doors for good wise) as they supply public good such as schools and police and an army. However a huge argument against this question is the VA and we are slowly seeing a response to public disappointment with the VA as the head of the VA was fired recently, as well as a new online program for claims. This is a result of public oversight, and holding someone accountable. This is arguably efficiency, as it is a response to poor service. In a way the free market nature of the united states and our ability to hold those accountable acts like a loss in market share, however instead of shutting down the bureaucracy there is reform, because unllike buisness there are no other competitors to the VA and the good provided is safe to say unprofitable and needs to have the cost spread throughout the population.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Bailey, that the bureaucracy's purpose is to get things done for the public and efficiency is just an added bonus if they can. Efficiency shouldn't be the ultimate goal of the bureaucracy though. For example, the DMV isn't efficient at all, yet they get their jobs done and that is the main goal for them. The DMV won't lose customers if they are inefficient because people have to go there to get their licenses, so they aren't worried about pleasing you with timing. Even though efficiency isn't a top priority for the government at the moment, it should definitely be something they should start working on for the future.
ReplyDeleteJust because something is doe fast doesn't mean that it is done the best way possible and even if it takes the DMV awhile to achieve their tasks they are still getting all the tasks done and there is no other places to go. the people need the DMV more than the DMV needs them. On the other hand if the DMV for example was faster maybe opinions of the government would be better and people would actually wasnt to work for the government if they were faster.
ReplyDeleteJust because something is doe fast doesn't mean that it is done the best way possible and even if it takes the DMV awhile to achieve their tasks they are still getting all the tasks done and there is no other places to go. the people need the DMV more than the DMV needs them. On the other hand if the DMV for example was faster maybe opinions of the government would be better and people would actually wasnt to work for the government if they were faster.
ReplyDelete