Oracle of Wisdom Journal of Philosophy and Public Affairs

Whenever a new concept or theory is grafted into an existing and specific body of knowledge as either a pace-setter or game-changer in that field, and after it might have successfully undergone integrity tests, the next action is to further improve on it by undertaking a critical and comparative assessment of it with other concepts or theories in different but related fields. Hence, this work centred around a critical and comparative assessment of the pace-setting and game-changing theory of implementalism (implemental theory of Budgeting) with other basic theories in the fields of administration and management. The main goal behind this analysis is to identify areas of strengths and weaknesses in both implemental theory of Budgeting and some of the basic theories of administration and management with a view to proffering workable solution that can enhance their future performance and productivity. The qualitative method using historical and content analysis of books, articles, materials and other relevant documents etc, was employed in the data gathering and examination processes. Findings from critical analysis of relevant data showed that, the lack of a formal and statutory law component in the basic theories of administration and management had been the major challenge in fulfilling management obligations and enhancing staff productivity when compared with implemental theory of budgeting. It was therefore recommended that, the basic theories of Administration and Management should be remolded and restructured to accommodate a formal pro-active and statutory law component that will always compel both management and staff to fulfill their obligations using the carrot and stick approach.

Open Full Text (PDF)