SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

The politics–administration dichotomy has been one of the most disputed theories of public administration. Despite serious critiques, neither the theoretical utility nor the normative power of the dichotomy has totally disappeared over the past decades. The dichotomy has been advocated on the grounds that the dichotomous division of labor and authority between elected and administrative officials increases the democratic accountability and planning ability of public administrators. This article first builds a theoretical model of the politics–administration dichotomy and then evaluates the model using empirical data collected from a nationwide sample of city managers serving in council-manager local governments. Results of structural equation modeling illustrate that the politics–administration dichotomy fails to obtain its predicted tendencies in actuality. The authors interpret the findings in light of the contemporary public administration literature. The article aims to make a theoretical-empirical contribution to one of the most challenging questions in public administration.