Abstract
THE position and functions of the scientific or technical expert have been the subject of many discussions and much difference of opinion. The general view of administrators is that “The expert should be on tap but not on top” ; but this arises from a widespread official assumption that intimate knowledge of a particular subject—unless it is of a literary or historical character—is a disqualification for an administrative post. The point of view of the professional civil servant was stated in a leading article in the November issue of State Service. The article suggests that a remedy of current social and economic maladjustment can only be found in the intensive use of the methods of scientific research and inquiry in problems which have hitherto generally been regarded as outside their province. If the achievements of the chemist, the physicist, the biologist and the engineer are to be correlated with the processes of public administration, and not stultified or misapplied through the inability or reluctance of politicians and administrators to appreciate the significance of new scientific development, the expert's processes of thought and action must be extended into fields of human activity where they are at present rarely encountered.
Article PDF
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Science in Administration. Nature 141, 219–221 (1938). https://doi.org/10.1038/141219a0
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/141219a0