Reprint of reports of the Commission on economy and efficiency regarding outlines of organization of the government

Front matter

^1

HoUinger Corp. pH8.5

REPRINT OF REPORTS

Introduction

At the outset of its work the commission was impressed with the fact that the Congress, the President, and the administrative officers were attempting to discharge the duties with which they are intrusted without sufficient knowledge regarding the instrumentalities through which these duties are to be performed. While it is true that officers of bureaus, divisions, etc., have information regarding the organization of their services, it is only in exceptional cases that such information has been compiled in a form to be readily available to others. Each service consequently has had to conduct its affairs without adequate knowledge regarding conditions elsewhere, and the higher administrative officers have been without the information so imperative to the exercise of real administrative control and direction.

Desirable as it may be that special efforts should be put forth from time to time to better governmental conditions, improvement and reform that is really worth while and lasting can be secured only by the adoption and current use of devices that enable administrators, from day to day, to pass judgment upon the effectiveness of the machinery and methods by which they are managing the affairs intrusted to them. In the same way that the commission is recommending, through other reports, that the accounting S3^stem of the Government be modified so that the information developed by the recording of financial transactions will be currently available for use by those in authority, it is also recommending, through the present report, the adoption of a plan b}^ which any officer of the Government will be able to know, at any time, exactly the manner in which the service in which he is interested is organized. With this information constantly at hand, each administrator will be in a position similar to that of the commander in chief of an army in the field. He will know each organization unit, whether it consists of a clerical service, a laboratory, workshop, a library, a w^arehouse, a station in the field, or other agency. He will be able to relate such unit to all other units, whether in his own or other services. He can determine where any piece of work can be done most effectively; whether the work of any particular unit is of sufficient importance to warrant the trouble and expense of its maintenance; the extent to which one unit can make use of the services of another, and thus avoid separate action with corresponding cost; and, generally, he can take all the steps necessary to avoid duplication of plant, or of personnel or work, or prevent overlapping or conflict of jurisdiction, and to secure effective cooperation between all branches of his own and other services of the Government.

It might appear that the points just stated are so obvious that their consideration at length is unnecessary. As a matter of fact, however, the commission found that this important phase of its undertaking was not at first fully appreciated by the departments and establishments when they furnished the information. They did not clearly see that the effort was being made to prepare a compilation that could be kept revised to date and currently used by them as a valuable aid or tool of administration. The commission therefore has felt that the value of this feature of its work should be emphasized.

That the commission was justified in undertaking this work is apparent from the fact that nowhere else at the present time is the infomiation furnished by this report available. Important as it is to an intelligent consideration of the problems of administration, no attempt has been made heretofore to set forth in detail the manner in which the Government of the United States is organized for the execution of its multifarious duties. Descriptions have been written of the organization of the Government, so far as the distribution of constitutional powers among the three coordinate divisions — the legislative, the executive, and the judicial — and the assignment of duties to the executive departments and establishments are concerned. At no time, however, has the effort been made to carry this description far enough to exhibit in an adequate manner the organization of the several departments, establishments, bureaus, and services for the jjerformance of their work.

As a result, administrative officials have been called upon to discharge their duties without that full knowledge of the machinery under their direction which it is imperative they should have in order to exercise effective administrative direction and control. They have not had full information as tO' the existing agencies, such as stations, laboratories, shops, divisions, etc., in their own services, much less what agencies existed in other services that might be used instead of creating similar agencies in their own services. Frequently Congress has been compelled to legislate without the complete data it should have if the most advantageous action is to be had. Finally, the people have been without that information necessary to accurate judgment regarding the manner in which their representatives, legislative and executive, are discharging their duties.

It is to the lac-k of this information that must be attributed in part the present condition of affairs, where stations, shops, and other units are being maintained which perform no useful function, or none of sufficient importance to warrant the expense of their operation; where the most effective use is not being made of such services as should be maintained ; where cooperation and consequent economy between services is a matter of chance or personal effort on the part of individuals, and where different services, performing the same or closely allied functions, are being operated independently of each other, thus duplicating in an uneconomical and inefficient manner the work of each other.

This could not be otherwise when the several services have no adequate means of laiowing what is being done by other services or what plant and equipment they possess. Under such circumstances each is compelled to rely upon itself to build up its own organization and to provide itself with its own facilities regardless of what may be in existence elsewhere. Not until adequate means are provided through which this information may be secured, and, once secured, may be kept constantly revised to date and made easily available, is it possible to treat the Government of the United States as one great whole in which, so far as practicable, unnecessary motion is avoided, duplication of plant is eliminated, and parts are integrated into one harmonious and efficient administrative mechanism. It is to render possible the achievement of this end, or at least to lay the basis for such achievement, that the preparation of this report has been undertaken.

In addition to performing this service the preparation of this report has given to the commission information that it was essential it should have in prosecuting its inquiries regarding governmental conditions. The present report thus constitutes the basis for the critical and constructive reports the commission has prepared or has in preparation regarding the organization of the Government as a whole and the organization and activities of individual services and particular problems of organization.

PLAN OF REPORT.

Although the idea of presenting a report on the organization of the Government is a simple one, the putting of this idea into execution involves the taking of a number of steps, each of which is necessary, if the compilation is to serve the full measure of its possible usefulness. These steps consist of the preparation of the following •

1. Outlines of organization.

2. Charts of organization,

3. Maps of organization.

4. Classification of organization units by character.

5. Classification of organization units by geographical location„

6. Organization index.

7. Geographical index.

8. Descriptive notes.

OUTLINES OF ORGANIZATTON.

The first is the outlines of organization. It is not only the most important, but is the basis for all the others. The purpose of these outlines is to exhibit the machinery of the entire Government — legislative, executive, and judicial — in such a way as to indicate not only every working unit into which the Government is organized for the performance of its functions, but also the relations of such units to each other as regards direct lines of administrative authority.

By a unit of organization is meant not merely such a formal organization as a bureau, a division, or a section, but all further subdivisions which comprise reasonably distinct groups of employees required for the performance of special duties; all plant or operation units, such as quarters specially devoted to the performance of particular kinds of work, vessels, warehouses, etc. Thus the plan contemplates, as one of its essential features, the indication of everything in the nature of a shop, laboratory, photographic gallery, blue-print room, depot, etc., and every point in the field at which a station is maintained or work is done by or under the direction of the Government. The effort is also made to show, in its proper place, each collateral agency of administration, such as a board, commission, or committee with reasonably permanent status, since these bodies constitute a part of the machinery through which the affairs of Government are being conducted.

Every effort has been made to carry the outlines of organization down to these final units, for it is only by showing these final working units that a real picture is obtained of the manner in which the Government is actually organized for the performance of its work. And it is only as information of this character is secured that it becomes possible to determine the extent to which a number of units of the same character are in existence, or that several units perform the same function, and thus to ascertain whether duplication or overlapping exists within the services of the same bureau or department, or within the Government as a whole.

For many reasons this outline of organization should be carried to its logical conclusion^ viz, that of showing the individual employees constituting the working force of each final unit of organization, properly classified and indicating for each his or her service title, compensation, and duties. Owing to the great difficulties that are involved, no attempt has been made to push the present outline that far, except in the case of the District of Columbia. In the case of the latter the effort was made in order to show by a practical example the character of outline of organization that would result and the valuable information that is thereby afforded. It has not been practicable up to the present time to do the same work for the other services.

As is elsewhere pointed out, the work of securing the data for the outlines in their present detail has been one of great magnitude. One of the principal difficulties encountered has been that of making clear to the hundreds of services and persons collaborating in supplying the data exactly what was wanted. Services having no clearly defined scheme of organization, upon being called upon to report the manner in which they are organized, have shown a strong tendency to work out an organization on paper which would show a logical assignment of duties to divisions, although in fact no such divisions were in existence, or, if in existence, were not grouped in the manner shown. With the best of intentions, and with a clear idea of what was desired, it was still a difficult matter, in many cases, to determine what was a unit of organization. These difficulties would be multiplied many fold if the attempt were made to treat the individual as

ECONOMY AND EFFICIENCY IN THE GOVERNMENT SEEVICE. 7

the final unit, since so many cases exist where the same individual performs duties in more than one organization unit.

These difficulties are by no means insuperable, as is demonstrated in the case of the District of Columbia. They can and should be overcome, and an outline of organization worked out that will show the place of each employee in the Government. It is evident, however, that this can not be done until a definite decision is reached regarding the organization units, under which tlie individuals should be shown. Both as a matter of practical expediency^ and because otherwise the publication of the present outlines and report would be greatly delayed, it has not been deemed advisable, therefore, at the present time to push this work that far except the single case that has been mentioned. There is, however, no reason why the several services should not take up their outlines as here presented and carry them to this desirable conclusion, and it is the recommendation of the commission that this be done in all cases.

Loose-leaf system. — Attention has been called to the fact that the main purpose of this compilation is to furnish information that can be currently used by administrators, in the same way as they currently use data developed by a proper accounting and reporting system, as one of their tools of administration. If the outlines are to serve this purjoose, it is imperative they should be prepared in such a way that they can be kept constantly revised to date. This end is secured by adopting the device of the loose leaf in presenting the data. Instead of attempting to set out the outline of the Government of the United States as one continuous statement the principle is adopted of giving on one sheet only the main subdivisions of the organization unit to which the sheet refers, and of presenting the detailed outlines of organization of these subdivisions on supporting sheets. If a change in organization takes place, all that needs to be done is the rewriting of the particular sheet or sheets affected and the substitution of the new sheet or sheets for the old.

The economy that can be realized is but a small part of the advantages resulting from the use of this loose-leaf system. In the first place, it brings out, in a way that a continuous statement fails to do, the coordinate units of organization. Thus, for example, if one desires to determine what are the primary units — that is, the bureaus and services — covered by the Department of Commerce and Labor, it would be necessary for him, in case the outline of organization of that department is shown as a continuous statement, to run over a large number of pages in order to pick out those bureaus and. services that are of coordinate rank as indicated by the indentation and identification code numbers. The same operation would have to be followed by hun if he desired to determine the primary units into which one of the bureaus is divided. Under the loose-leaf system these coordinate units appear one below the other on the same sheet, the subdivisions of each being carried on supporting sheets which are referred to by page numbers.

This system, if rigidly adhered to, would require a separate sheet in each case where a subdivision of a unit is set up. This would require hundreds, if not thousands, of sheets in order to show the organization of a single department. It is not necessary, however, to carry this loose-leaf system to such an extreme. In many cases the

8 ECONOMY A^^D EFFICIEISrCY IN" THE GOVEENMENT SERVICE.

organization in detail of a unit of organization can be given as a continuous statement, since the number of subordinate units shown is not so great as to prevent the eye from readily detecting the coordinate subdivisions. In preparing this report, the commission has consequently exercised its discretion in determining to what extent details should be carried on supporting sheets. The individual departments and services are not bound, however, by the decision of the commission in this respect. In maintaining their own outlines they should depart from the decision of the commission in so far as in their opinion seems wise.

Another advantage of the loose-leaf system is that it makes it possible for the several services to take up the outline where it now leaves off and secure further details of organization, these additional details being entered upon supporting sheets inserted in their proper places. Finally, the use of loose leaves makes it possible, if it is desired to do so, to split up the outlines into parts and give to each service only those sheets which affect its organization.

Scheme of classification of organization units. — The general scheme of classification that has been adopted is clearly shown by the outlines. There are a few features, however, upon which it is desirable specially to comment.

The first feature is that the primary aim of the outlines is to show organization rather than functions. It might seem that little trouble would be encountered in doing this. Practically, however, many difficulties have been encountered in carrying out this aim. Strange as it may seem, many services or important branches of services have no well recognized scheme of organization units that extends below the primary units into which they are divided. Such services would report " classes of work " or functions as their organization units. This tendency Avas one generalh' encountered throughout the work, and the commission has had to use care in unraveling the complications thus presented and in arriving at statements that represented actual organization conditions. Notwithstanding the efforts made it is certain that a satisfactory solution has not been arrived at in all cases.

In one important respect, however, the matter of functions does find a place, or at least expression, in this scheme of organization. As organization is shown by successive subdivisions, there is a steady progress, from units representing divisions of service more or less arbitrarily established in order that supervision over certain work to be done may be vested in the hands of certain officials, to units representing particular duties to be performed, until the point is reached where organization units correspond very closely with functional units. This is quite generally true of final units, which frequently represent little more than an enumeration of the classes of work or classes of employees included in the next more comx^rehensive unit. In other words, the fact must be recognized that, as organization is carried to a finer and finer degree, the units become, from a strictly organization standpoint, less and less definite, and m.ore and more descriptive of functions.

A second feature is the principle upon which these organization units are classified. This principle is that of indicating the organization units so as to show their relationship to each other as determined by direct lines of administrative authority. By applying this principle the place of each unit in the entire scheme is shown in relation to the successive units through which the lines of authority extend both up and down, and the extent to which units are coordinate is brought out.

T^yo consequences of following this principle should be noted. The first is that the fact that two units are coordinate in rank by no means indicates that they are of even approximately equal importance either as to size or as to character of work. For example, a unit having but a single employee, as a library, may appear side by side with large divisions, such as those of disbursement or supplies having a large personnel.

The second is that the outlines can not show relationships between units except as determined by the main line of administrative authority. Thus, for example, the unit " chief clerk " or " division of appointments " will have direct functional relations with probably all_ the units of a service. The outlines, however, will indicate such unit only as it falls under some more comprehensive unit and show under it the working units for the performance of its work. The facts in regard to its functional activities or duties in respect to other units can be brought out only by the charts, as will be pointed out hereafter, or by means of the descriptive notes which should accompany and explain the outlines.

Groujnng of organization units. — There are many cases where a number of units have to do with matters so closely related to each other that it is desirable to show them under some group designation even though there is actually no unit of organization corresponding to such designation. The most important example of this is found in the case of the divisions or sections of a department, bureau, or other service having to do with matters of general administration. For example, the Department of Commerce and Labor has as its primary units of organization not only such functional bureaus as the Bureau of Corporations, Bureau of Standards, Coast and Geodetic Survey, etc., but also certain business divisions, such as the Office of the Chief Clerk, Division of Appointments, Division of Publications, and Disbursing Clerk. The duties of these divisions relate to the work of the department as a whole instead of to work in a particular field. It was thought that a useful purpose would be served by making clear this distinction between units having duties in relation to the department as a whole and those having certain duties in relation to their own fields. This is done b}^ grouping the former with the office proper of the Secretary and Assistant Secretary (both of whom also have duties in respect to the whole department) under the general desii>'nation of " General administration." Of course it is possible to do this only so far as it can be done without doing violence to organization conditions as they actually exist. If one of the functional bureaus is given charge of the performance of certain duties, such as publication work or the handling of supplies, for not only itself but the other bureaus, a division handling such matters would have to be shown under that bureau in which it is actually located. Only in exceptional cases, however, is this condition of affairs found to exist.

An interesting example of the adoption of this system of grouping related services, which has found expression in formal administrative

40699°— 12 2 regulations, is to be seen in the Navy Department. There the large number of bureaus going to make up the general administration of the department, as distinct from the management of the fleet, naval stations, and ships under construction in private yards, are, with the exception of the offices of the Secretary, Assistant Secretary, Chief Clerk, and General Board, grouped in four classes known as Division of Operations of the Fleet, Division of Personnel, Division of Material, and Division of Inspection. These are mere group designations since there are no organization units, properly speaking, corresponding to them.

Classification of commiss-ions, hoards, and Government establishments. — Still another matter requiring a few words of explanation has to do with the decision reached by the commission in respect to the assignment of commissions, boards, and independent Government establishments, to their proper places in the scheme of outline of organization. This is a matter that gave the commission a great deal of trouble, and it is not certain that in every case a decision has been reached that will be approved by all. The cases giving rise to the greatest difficulty were those of determining whether certain commissions should be shown as subordinate units of Congress, or subordinate units of the executive, or a particular department, and of determining whether certain services usually classed as " other Government establishments" should be indicated under that head or under "legislative." Reference is had to the Government Printing Office, the Library of Congress, and the National Botanic Garden. It was finally decided that they should be shown as subordinate units of the legislative branch, since the line of administrative control and supervision seems to run directly from them to Congress.

Problems of nomenclature. — Finally some reference should be made to the difficulties encountered growing out of the absolute lack of system that exists in respect to the naming of organization units. Such designations as " divisions," " sections," " offices/' " branches," and the like seem to be used almost interchangeably. In some cases subdivisions of a division are known as sections, while in other cases the section is the more comprehensive and the division the subordinate unit. In many cases units have not been given any well-recognized designation, and names for them have been provided for the first time for the purposes of this outline. The particular designation employed for a unit can not thus be relied upon as indicating either its status or importance.

In handling this matter the commission has, with few exceptions, followed the scheme of nomenclature used by the different services in their reports to the commission. The most important instances in which the commission has used its discretion in respect to this matter are the dropping of the words " office of " and giving simply the name of the officer in charge, as, for example, " chief clerk " instead of " office of chief clerk," and in adopting a standard title for the immediate office of the head of a service. The designation employed is " Office proper of the Secretary" (or other officer as the case may be). This designation is intended to cover only the employees, such as private secretary, doorkeeper, and messenger, working directly for the officer designated. It logically constitutes the first unit under the designation " General administration."

In other cases it alone comprehends all that would come under such designation. The same confusion exists in respect to the titles that are employed to designate heads of administrative services. Among the titles most commonly employed to designate chief administrative officers are : " Chief of bureau," " commissioner," " director," " superintendent," though special titles, such as " Forester," are by no means uncommon. The titles used in the outlines are those reported to the commission. In one important respect the com_mission has not attempted to be consistent: Although the outlines as a rule indicate units by office designations, in many cases use for this purpose is made of the title of an officer. To have done otherwise would have meant the coining of a name for the office or the prefixing of the words " office of." It was not thought that any gain in clearness would result from doing this.

CHARTS or ORGANIZATION.

The second step indicated as a desirable one to be taken in order to present full information regarding the organization of the Government is that of the preparation of charts of organization. The function of the charts is to serve as an illustration of the outlines in order that the significant features of the outline may be more readily seen. It is not essential, indeed in many cases it is hardly desirable, that the charts should picture all the details shoAvn in the outlines; but, as far as they go, they should correspond rigidly to the outlines. As recommended in the case of the outlines, the charts should be constructed upon the loose-leaf system, main subdivisions being shown on one sheet and supporting details on accompanjnng sheets.

In one important particidar the charts can be made to convey information that can not be shown by the outlines. By use of dotted lines interrelations between units of organization other than the relation of direct administrative authority can be indicated on the charts. In many cases this aids materially in making known the character of the organization as a piece of working mechanism.

MAPS OF ORGANIZATION.

The third feature of a complete plan to describe organization is the preparation of maps that will indicate all points at which any given service or department, or of the Government as a whole, is maintaining any station or other unit of organization, or is exercising any function. These maps can be made to serve one of the most useful purposes of the whole compilation. There is a tendency on the part of persons connected with the Government at Washington to look upon the work at Washington as constituting the real Government of the United States, In point of fact, a characteristic feature of the National Government is that it administers a service, the real working units of which are in great part scattered throughout the United States and, indeed, to a certain extent, throughout the world. The services at Washington, in the main, constitute merely the central office for the performance of the necessary clerical and other work required in exercising proper supervision and administrative control over the work being performed in the field. It is this fact which

12 ECONOMY AND EFFICIENCY IN THE GOVERNMENT SERVICE.

makes the problem of administration of the National Government essentially different from and more difficult than the problem of administration of the government of municipalities. It is in the maintaining of stations and in the performing of work in the field that the great bulk of expenditures for the conduct of the National Government is incurred. If there are unnecessary services or units of organization ; if effective use is not made of such units as should be maintained ; if there is duplication of services or plants ; and if waste or inefficiency exists through a failure to correlate the operations of different units or centralize the performance of particular kinds of work, it is probable these defects will be found in the field services rather than in the offices of general administration at Washington, which are under the immediate direction and control of the managing officers. For this reason it is imperative that any plan to set forth the organization of the Government should include as one of its essential features means for making known the exact situation of affairs as to units of organization maintained in the field.

The outlines of organization will indicate all such units. In order that their relations to each other may be readily seen, and the extent to which they are located at the most advantageous points can be considered, it is necessary that this location should be shown by maps. The use of maps, moreover, presents the advantage tliat field stations of different services can be shown in relation to each other, something which can not possibly be done by the outlines. Thus, in addition to preparing maps showing the field stations for each service individually, consolidated maps can be made for two or more related services, or for all services under the same department, or for all services of the Government. In these consolidated maps the different services can be distinguished from each other by the use of different symbols, such as circles, crosses, and stars, to indicate the stations of the different services. In the same way stations of a different character belonging to the same service can be distinguished.