Making use of an enduring public administration myth

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine the concept of the public interest. The central question is whether the public interest is a usable concept in a time of social and political change. A historical overview of the public interest is provided. Two researchers are highlighted: David John Farmer and O.C. McSwite. The paper concludes by proposing the refusal of subjective identification with the public interest. Design/methodology/approach Discourse theory and Lacanian psychoanalysis are discussed in this paper. The emphasis in both approaches is to examine ethical challenges in politics and administration through new epistemological lenses. A further use of these research strategies is to identify existing institutional practices and situate administrative decision-making within those practices. Findings The findings in this paper indicate that while institutional resistance is useful, it can also be co-opted or result in retribution. In both cases, power is asserted and maintained by those who hold institutional power. David John Farmer’s work on anti-administration and O.C. McSwite’s work on administrative refusal are effective strategies to address the abuse of institutional power. Originality/value This paper introduces the concept of subjective identification to the literature of public administration. Subjective identification offers administrators a new approach to the ethical dilemmas they face in the workplace.