Human Resource Management and

Development: The role of

bureaucracy
Namrata Kothari

We are living in an age of technological revolution

where computers are now an integral part of our
work processing. Inspite of this high technology
development human resources remains the
most important resource in an organisation . The
earlier idea of personnel management in the
sense of a manipulative resource management
like financial or inventory management had since
been replaced by a more dynamic and positive
concept of human resource management.
Therefore , the role of bureaucracy is a complex
and challenging area of speacialisation. More so,
in third world countries contemporaneous
challenges and the nature of tasks which a
bureaucrat faces have undergone changes of
great magnitude, both in quality and [Link]
the developing countries, welfare orientation in
administration has necessitated taking a new look
at the existing bureaucratic policies and practices.
In sharp contrast to the role of Public Service
Commissions as solely examination conducting
agencies, search has been going on to evolve a
suitable model which takes care of various issues
relating to other bureaucratic matters in a
converted way. Central personnel agencies have
been conceived as agencies to improve working
of the services by a more methodical and unified
control. They are also expected to coordinate
action of various departments in the field of
personnel [Link] should be clear that
personnel or human resource management is a
staff function whose basic purpose is to help the
organisation to achieve its goal. The significance
of the personnel management system and
bureaucracy has direct bearing on the evolving
organisation designs and structures. In public
administration, the role of bureaucracy constitutes
a vital role for efficient administration. In other
words, the efficiency of the total administrative
system depends on the efficient working of its
bureaucrats.

Signifiance of Human Resource Management

Management means getting things done with proper use of materials :

human resource, financial resource and material and infrastructural resource.

This involves enlisting human efforts and releasing human energy within an

organization. Therefore, Human Resource management forms the core of

management functions. Whatever be the position of the senior management

people in an organization - it can be in financial management sector, or

production management wing or any other sector of activities - a manager

has essentially to look after two things : work management and personal

management. Management of work is integrally connected with management

of personnel. In a big organization, personnel functions are sought to be

concentrated in a personnel department, which, then assumes the character

of a staff agency.
 In administration, personnel administration constitutes a vital sector of

administration. It is a truism that no administration can rise very high above

the quality of its administrators. In otherwords, the efficiency of the total

administrative system depends on the efficient working of its personnel

subsystem.

Development and bureaucracy

After the second world war, many of the Afro -Asian states emerged out

of the colonial experience and embarked on radical socio -economic

reconstructions in a planned manner.

The main focus of state activity changed from revenue collection and

law and order maintenance to speedy development of human and natural

resources, removal of poverty and malnutrition and upgrading of the quality

of life of the common man. The role of administration changed from

‘Executive’ mode to ‘managerial’ mode. Pai Panandiker says ‘the executive’

type of admihnistration is largely designed to carry out the directions of the

government; it seeks to fulfil all the legal requirements of public service. By

and large, the functions of this type are to maintain law and order, to regulate

social and economic life of the society in accordance with statutory

requirements, and to carry our governmental directions. In contrast, the

‘management’ oriented development administration is programmatically

inclined and it focuses its attention not merely on ‘carrying out’ of the various

governmental directions but rather on securing programmatic values or, in

other words, on the achievement of goals and successful completion of

programmes. Mr. K. Hanumanthaiya made the following remark which is very

relevant “The British left behind an administrative machine which was

meant for colonial administration. We have not, however, during the last fifty-

nine years since we attained Independence, made any substantial changes in

the system so as to reorient it to the goals of development and welfare.

In the contemporary world, it is not possible for anyone to avoid

confrontation with governmental agencies such as police, tax municipal

authorities, authorities dealing with public utilities like public transport

sanitation, supply of electricity, supply water, pollution etc. many times a day

within our normal daily routine. The realm of bureaucratic authorities has

gained in size and importance owing to the enormous horizon of the modern

political regimes, which tends to encompass manifold activities with a view to

achieving goals in a more scientific way. No modern state can think of

surviving without the minimum support of the bureaucratic structures, as

these agencies are capable of achieving objectives in an extremely efficient

manner for big governmental organisations and other public sector

institutions.

Civil service and other administrative agencies-dominate modern

societies and political regimes. These agencies comprising the members of

the executive branch below the chief political executive are normally

responsible for not only implementing public policies but also influence the

process of policy making. There has been an increase in the size of

government bureaucracies all over the world as a result of the proliferation

in the governmental functions. But the growth of the modern state and the

demands of the social and economic development have given rise to

administrative structures and their multiplication. These bureaucratic

structures have assumed immense importance and power in view of their

technical, intellectual superiority and expertise compares to their amateur

less educated political executives.

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN POLITICAL AND PERMANENT EXECUTIVES

Power is the most important variable in the study of the bureaucracy. The

control of bureaucracy by political leaders has of late diminished due to the

growth in the size and discretionary powers of bureaucracies. The

relationship between the political leaders and bureaucracy is very intricate

and complex, symbiotic as far as the formation and implementation of policies

is concerned. Bureaucratic help, guidance and support are vital to the political

leadership and bureaucrats have many assets : their permanence,freedom

from electoral worries,their knowledge of the files,and their control of

communication - which they can use to get their way in encounters with

political masters.

Relationship between the bureaucracy and the politicians shows that

there is a general trend towards strengthening of bureaucracies vis -a-vis the

political [Link] to generalize this is not easy, keeping in view the fact

that the specific situation varies from country to country. In Britain,

bureaucrats are recruited and trained to show political sensitivity, their

influence will, therefore, be interpretative. But French political system, being

characterised by greater political instability and the traditions of stronger

political authority, makes too much use of bureaucracy. Bureaucratic power is

concentrated in the two wings of the administrative system : grands corps

and the polytechnicians. Due to their broad based education, highly elitist
character, the bureaucrats are well equipped to exercise power and keep a

grip over administrative machinery.

It appears the bureaucracy occupies a relatively subordinate position vis -a-vis

the political executives in the USA. There is a system of appointment of

political executives on a very large scale at the will of the America n President.

But these appointments are done in a hasty manner. Besides ,there are short

tenured and temporary in nature and sometimes the lack of party discipline

and programmes make these appointees less significant in the political

system. As a result, the permanent executive emerge more powerful and

influential.

FUNCTIONS OF BUREAUCRACY IN MODERN TIMES

In modern democratic political nations, bureaucracy is entrusted with the

function to implement the rules and policies made by the legis lature. Rule-
implementation is considered to be ‘mechanical’ and a ‘quasi-automatic
process’. But this view is ‘oversimplified’ as administrators help heir ministers
to prepare the decisions as they cannot draft all the rules and regulations
without the help of the bureaucrats. Therefore, the help given by the
administrators to their ministers is great magnitude in view of the fact that
even rule -making has become a very complex function. The political regimes
are involved in the preparation of both s hort and long-term socio-economic
development plans and policies. Hence it would be ironical to say that the
administrators just play a role in the implementation of the rules and
programmes formulated by the state from time to time, instead , their
contribution in the filed of formulation of the rules, regulations, policies, and
programmes is very important and of far reaching consequences.

But, even the process of implementation should not be considered as

“automatic and mechanical”. Rule implementation is also a decision making

process as the administrators have to choose one path from among various

alternatives available to them (J. Blondel).

Bureaucracy in Developing Societies
Recent trends indicate that in the emerging developing societies,

bureaucracy has come to acquire the following features:

Bureaucracy has been regarded as an important instrument for

modernisation, growth and development. But experiences generally in third

world shows that bureaucracy has not been able to deliver goods as

effectively as the theorists on bureaucracy had desired and expected.

Infact,the structural and behavioural characteristics of bureaucracy proved to

be instrumental in impeding development.

Secondly, unlike the developed countries there is less differentiation of

functions in the developing countries as a result of which the powers and

importance of bureaucracy crossed its legitimate limits.

Thirdly, appointments are done on the ground of merit, which is

judged through a public competitive examination comprising both written and

personality tests. But the intervention of primordial factors such as personal,

caste, tribal, ethnic or religious considerations is still a tragic reality. Favours

are bestowed on the basis of non-merit factors to those who qualify the

written tests. Appointment to important posts is done mainly on the non-

merit considerations. Ethnic considerations have emerged as a strong basis

for public appointments. In states like India, there is a system of reservation

of seats to the members of most and other backward castes and classes in

the matters of public appointments. This is done with a view to make

bureaucracy a representative bureaucracy. Such practices tend to limit the

ability of states to make effective rules for the society. There is absence of

uniform procedures regarding the selection and recruitment of bureaucrats.

This adversely effects bureaucratic efficiency which results in administrative

inefficiency.

Fourthly, the politicisation of bureaucracy is another characteristic in the

developing countries like India. The concept of “committed bureaucracy” was

mooted by the Late Prime Minister Indira Gandhi in the late 1960s implying

that bureaucrats should be committed to the party in power. But due to great

public cry, Mrs. Gandhi had to later revise her stance clarifying that what she

wanted was commitment to the basic law of the land rather than the

government. But the fact is that there has been erosion of the principle of

bureaucratic neutrality in India. The appointment to top officials both at

the centre and the states are done on the basis of personal,ethnic,caste and

party considerations. The reshuffling and transfers of civil servants before

and after the elections have become a common phenomenon. The situation

in African states is still worse than the situation in Asia. In Kenya, Tanzania,

Zambia, Nigeria, and Uganda as the policy of political mobilisatioin became an

established feature of p olitical systems, the political parties felt it necessary to

look for the support of the bureaucratic machinery. As a result, a variety of

pattern of links between the political parties and the bureaucracy came into

play in these nations. Owing to these relationships, the bureaucracies in

these states appear to function in a subservient status vis -a-vis the office of

the Presidency within the framework of African socialist ideology and

benevolent welfare capitalism. The enmity between the political p arties and

the state bureaucracies have at times become quite intensive, giving more

impetus to the office of Presidency and to the institutionalisation of

patrimonalism and personal rulership. Such phenomenon is present in the

Latin American countries also.

Fifthly and finally another feature of bureaucracy in developing countries

is the existence of large scale corruption within its ranks. In a recent survey,

it was found that Indians tops in paying the bribes and kick backs even in

foreign countries to gain favour in business.

Development and the role of bureaucracy in third world countries:

After 1945 War, the former colonies were to attempt a mammoth

exercise to bring about development in their respective [Link] goals of

the rapid economic development were to be combined with the democratic

political development. Development meant nation-building, growth, equity,

democracy, stability and autonomy. These countries had inherited a colonial

bureaucracy .The characteristics of colonial bureaucracy included

centralisation of authority, hierarchical, generalist administrators, neutrality.

Such a bureaucracy was elitist, authoritarian and paternalistic. Any

organisation of such characteristics as colonial bureaucracy cannot be

effective in playing a role in the development process. Therefore the task of

policing and revenue collection came to be doubted as the effective tool for

development and growth.

But some scholars made a plea to these countries to attempt to stre ngth

the centralised, efficient and strong bureaucracies, if they were to achieve the

task of economic,social and political development. Joseph La Palombara

argued for a powerful bureaucracy is said to be essential if one is to override

the disintegrating influences of artificial political boundaries, the competitive

forces of familial and tribal structures,the difficulty for organising and

financing political parties, the low energy output of the population and the

tendency of the population to want to e xpand funds on consumer gadgets

rather than on capital formation. In developing states, powerful

bureaucracies are simply necessary evils that one must learn to tolerate,

hoping for the best from a democratic standpoint.

It can be concluded with these discussions that despite the serious criticism

and the dysfunctionalities with which bureaucracy suffers, it has come to stay

a s a vital and effective institution of goverance. No political regime of

whatever nature and ideology can do without it. However, there are

considerable differences about the way the bureaucracy functions and the

kind of role it performs in different political regimes depending upon the way

its members are recruited trained and inducted in the political system. Its

specific role in governance would also depend upon the relationship with other

political institutions and the political leadership in the country concerned. In

the past two decades, the emergence of new public management movement

in most countries has sought to downsize the role and apparatus of

bureaucracy in most political regimes; but nowhere in the world has

bureaucracy come to be completely abolished, which reinforces its continued

importance in shaping the activities of modern political regimes, particularly

economic development, efficient administration and stability.

Infact,the success of the plan formulation and implementation, effectiveness

and efficiency of governmental operations, achievement of targets and

organisational goals largely depend upon the functional efficiency of the

administrative and technical personnel at all levels. The top level

administators, however, should be able to relate the accelerating rate of

technological change to present and projected programmes. They should be

aware of economic and social forces which have an import on governmental

business. The civil service by and large claims to be responsive. It is

apparent that the single most important motivating factor for staff is the

opportunity to be of service to the public. It seems almost miraculous that the

desire to genuinely serve the public should be born, should survive and ;

should flourish admist all the politics, tensions and impersonal imperatives of

modern bureaucracy. The concept of service, has thus remained c onspicuous

in spite of the many changes which might have been expected to erode it.1

The rapid unending expansion of developmental activities has created

complex problems and the greatest single obstacle to progress is the

shortage of trained manpower. This problem can be surmounted only by

instituting right type of personnel policy with the objective of producing, as

rapidly as possible, the skilled and knowledgeable personnel needed in

modern administration. In scientific management, efficiency is understood to

the synonymous with economy in operations.

Representative bureaucracy:Emerging Trend

Recent Studies on the social background of top administrators in some

of the countries have shown that higher civil servants might be said t o form a

‘distant social group’ or to serve as the ‘representative’ of the upper classes,

but as efforts are being made to broadbase the civil service representation,

the composition is changing though the pace is slow. It is interesting to note

that social perspectives having entered the bureaucracy through the

recruitment process, and reflecting the social background of civil servants,

has been an important theme in recent administrative studies.2 The basic

argument has been that bureaucrats carry their class prejudices into their
official life land only when all classes are properly represented in the civil

service when the different viewpoints get due consideration. Studies have

shown that higher civil service in India is largely drawn from a small (1 0%)

section of the community. The position is no different in most advanced as

well as developing countries, as the middle class occupational groups

dominate the higher civil service to the extent of 80- to 85 per cent. Iranian

civil service reflects in its composition an increasing number and proportion of

members with higher educational qualifications. In Australia, for many

decades, both the commonwealth public service and the various state

services were recruited at the school-leaving level and the junior school

level. The recruitment was for routine jobs and promotion to higher positions

was selective.3 It kept the best people out. India, Bangladesh and Pakistan

differ from the more advanced ones essentially in the high degree of its over-

representation which depends on the proportionate strength of the middle

class in the total work force. Many attribute the success of American

democracy to the representative character of the Federal civil service. On the

other hand Bruce Hacket has observed that, “the finding that higher civil

servants in the United States have been drawn from a rather broad social

base in contrast to the traditional experience of some European societies,

might be viewed as evidence that in this case recruitment has been main ly on

the basis of talent or technical proficiency rather than social considerations.

The bureaucracy has also been viewed as a representative institution,

differing from its European counterparts mainly in being more “democratic in

this respect” 4 . In Africa, the public view of the government service has been

one of suspicion. There is still too much of a tendency for civil servants to

regard themselves as privileged intellectual elite removed from the politicians

as well as from the masses.

Peoples Participation

Political modernisation in developing countries implies that there should be

meaningful people’s participation in governmental decision making. Public

bureaucracy is an important instrument of political modernisation in

developing countries and consequently as an institutional arrangement, has to

bear the greatest strain of converting political and social demands into

programmes and actions. Bureaucracy has also to continually adjust to

competing political demands. In many countries like Iran,Bangladesh,

Pakistan and Indonesia, bureaucracy at times shares power with military. In

countries where there are stable bureaucracies but unstable political systems,

the administration has not been able to meet the growing challenge of

modernisation and social change. The main problem in many developing

countries remains : how to strike a balance between administration and

politics because the hypertrophy of politics is as undesirable as the

bureaucratic bulge. The ability and capability of administration to play its part

in the development process is greatly influenced by the peoples participation.

Administrative reforms also frequently occur in response to major political

changes. The political context also influences the working of the internal

system. In many countries of the group, policy formulation is accepted to be

the role of political processes and its implementation the task of

administration. The compulsion of situation and the political implications of

policy alternatives and of discretion makes it difficult to the senior civil

servant to maintain a purely neutral position. It has been observed that, “if

he is to function effectively, a politically neutral senior administrator must be

committed to the national goals of his society and be sensitive t o its political
process.” 5 At the higher levels, civil servants must have political

sensitivity as well as technical skills. The political implications of techno-

administrative decisions have to be weighed. The enlarged scope of the

governmental activity and the decline of the Parliament have favoured

growth in the political influence of top civil servants. The administrative

centralisation in France, has increased the political role of the higher

bureaucracy but in general top grades can be highly politicised only when

powerful and well organised political parties control the totality of the political

system. In pluralistic democracies, political participation has been increasing

since the adoption of universal suffrage. The presence of pressure groups and

intergroups rivalries tend to preclude the possibility of top civil servants being

highly politicised in a partisan sense, but the same conditions make them

more aware of political inputs and outputs in decision making process. In

Africa, it has become necessary for the public services to ensure that they are

organsed to provide one of the pressure groups in socieity for the promotion

necessary for development. In every country, the degree of political

hegemony is inversely proportional to the degree of bureaucratic hegemony.

Perhaps the single most important lesson to be learnt from the passage of the

Civil Service Reform Act, 1978 in USA is that public policy is not created in a

vacuum. It is influenced by more than it influences its environment. The

working of the political system, specially in the developing countries, has

shown that in a struggle for power between public bureaucracy and political

leadership, the former thrives, if the leadership authority is weak. Looking at

Africa as a whole and some countries of Asia, the political revolution, that

brought the leaders power, has failed to satisfy the economic and social needs

of the people. This has led even to the overthrow in many cases of the

elected govts by their armed forces and in others to the emergence of one-
party states. In the new African States, the public service was subject to new

pressures from party politics, tribal interests, and often selfish ambitions.

Most of these pressures were decisive, with damaging effects on the mora le

and efficiency of the civil service.6

Problems

Bureaucracy’s problem can be partly attributed to the fact that it can

seldom perform surgical operations on its workforce. Much of the

reorganization effort would depend on outside evaluation and the open door

policy. There is the need to have small units in each department who can

ask pointed questions. The central policy review staff is asking such questions

about policy, looking ahead, trying to be much critical of the administratio n.

Such an evaluation, asking difficult questions will prevent the bureaucracy

sinking back into a perhaps complacent or a non-thinking attitude. The

expanding economic activities demand that not only civil servants in general

be fully equipped and trained for the great tasks but orientation and

motivation should permeate specially the higher echelons. Such orientation is

being provided in almost all countries to equip them to undertake the more

complex tasks and to create the necessary environment. It is also to be

ensured that better tools and techniques are used at all levels to improve

performance and productivity. In recent years, every government is looking

more closely at the basic day-to-day problems in promoting the growth and

development of individuals in an orderly and systematic manner as no

organisation is stronger than the top brass to direct its activities. These are

the officers who are the prized asset on whom rests the responsibility for

continual successful operations as well as fu ture growth of personnel

administration. Lack of proper planning for continual availability of such

persons may prove fatal in emergent situations.

Administrative culture,Bureaucracy and Development:

Every Civil service has its own administrative culture, a sub-culture of

its society. It consists of a set of patterns and guidelines for behaviour that

are distinctive form but not inconsistent with patterns generally applicable to

the country as a [Link] administrative culture can be viewed wit h

attitudes and standards, values, beliefs, and assumptions of individual civil

servants.7 The growth of this administrative culture has been conditioned

and even controlled by a good number of organisational characteristics.

There are many factors where formal relationships between individuals in

organizations have effects on the attitudes, status and social arrangements

within the organisation. Formal structures, which in the proposed model of

central personnel agency will be determined by the exigencies of situations

and circumstances, are likely to contribute to the administrative culture

needed to man the challenges which are in the offing. Conversely the

administrative culture which is prevailing specially in these days, has serious

repercussions on the formal relationships.8 Nicole S. Morgan has drawn

attention to this in Canada where she found that the current age structures of

administrative officials in the federal civil service, which has resulted from

recruitment patterns in an earlier period, is having an impact on attitudes of

officials which contribute to declining productivity and growing ineffectiveness

in the federal bureaucracy.9 The coming decades require an administrative

culture which puts a premium on work ethic and a new work culture. In

order that the government is result bound and not procedure bound, the

central personnel agency will have to initiate action whenever called upon to

do so.
 It is clear that a qualitative change in the civil service whereby they are

effectively to act as servants of the people requires a conscious inculcation of

attitudes and values. This is not possible if traditional codes of conduct

continue. The problem is further complicated by the difference in life styles

sophistication and opportunities. Well designed recruitment and training

policies are being evolved to take care of this aspect. Many attempts are also

being made by various countries through quota systems, reservations,

language options and such methods to allow into the civil service of a large

section of the society.A countries development largely depends on its

efficient administration and here comes the vital and positive role of

[Link] Human resource development and efficient bureaucracy

will go a long way in the socio -ecomonic development of a country.

1 Sir Douglas Wass, “The Public Service in Modern Society”, Public

Administration, Spring , 1983, p.18

2 Norton Long, the Polity, Chacago, 1962, p. 70. Van Ruper Warner, et al.,

The American Federal Executive, OUP, 1963, Egbert. S. Wengert, “Some

Thoughts on Executive Development in the Philippine Government”, Philippine

Journal of Public Administration, Vol. II, No. 4 October, 1958.

For these studies refer V. Subramanian, “Representative Bureaucracy; A

Reassessment”, American Political Science Review, Washington, 1967, Harold

M. Hodges (Jr.) Social Stratification : Class in America, Scherkan, Cambridge,

1964, T. Feyzioglu, “The Reforms of the French Civil Service Since 1945-57”,

London, Vol. XXXIII, pp 75-78.

4 Burce Hackets, Higher Civil Servants in California, Berkeley, 1967, p. 118. R.

K. Kelsall, Higher Civil Servants in Britain, London, Routledge, 1955. T. B.

Bottomore, Higher Civil Servants in France, Transactions of the Second World

Congre ss of Sociology, Vol. II, 1954. V. Subramanian. Socail Background of

India’s Adminisatrators, Delhi, Publiclation Division, 1971, Ch. lI. S. J.

Thambiah, “Ethnic Representration in Ceylon’s Higher Administrative Service,

1870-1946,” University of Ceylon Review, XIII, 1955, pp. 113-114, J. Donald

Kingsley, Representative Bureaucracy, Ohio, Antioch Press, 1944, p. 274.

Akira Kubota,

5 Report of Interregional Seminar on the Development of Senior

Administrators in the Public Service of Developing Countrie s, p. 5, W. Rodney,

How Europe Underdevelped Africa,Dar-es-Salam, 1972, J. P. Mackintosh, et

al., Nigerian Government and Politics, London, 1966. Report of a Mission sent

to Kenya on Kenya: Into the Second Decade, London, John Hopkins, 1975.

6 Mattei Dogan (ed.)., The Mandarins of Western Europe: The Political Role of

Top Civil Servants, New York, Sage, 1975. Ch. VIII. Richard Symonds, The

British and Their Successors: A Study in the Development of the Government

Services in the New States, London, Faber and Faber, 1966, Ch. V./ Lawrence

Ziring, The Ayub Khan Era: Politics in Pakistan 1958-1969, Syracuse,

Syracuse University Press, 1971, Ch. VI., H.M.A. Oniteri ands A.A. Ayida,

Reconstruction and Development in Nigeria, Ibadan, 1971. Jack goody (ed.),

Changing Social Structure in Gh. m, London, 1975. Parvez Hasan, Korea:

Problems and Issues in a Rapidly Growing Economy, London, John Hopkins,

1976, Ch. III. Richard Harris (ed), The Political Economy of Africa, New York,

John Wiley. 1975

7 Refer World De velopment Report, 1984, Oxford, University Press. Also

Gerald M. Meier and Dudley Seers, (ed.), Pioneer in Development, A World

Bank Publication, Oxford University Press, 1984.

8 Refer A. F. Leemans (ed.). The Management of Change in Government, The

Hague, Institute of Social Studies, 1976, p. 9. Also Elyas. Omar, “Civil

Servicde System in Malayasia”, APDAC Workshop on New Policies,

Developments and Trends in the Civil Service in Asian Countries, September,

9-18, 1979, Singapore.

9 Nicol S. Morgan, Nowhere to go ? The Institute for Research on Public

Policy, Montreal, 1981. Also Prime Mionister’s Broadcast to the Indian Nation

January 5, 1985. International Association of Schools and Institutes of

Administration, International Cooperation for Education and Training in Public

Management, with emphasis uon developing nations by Ernest A. Engelbert

and Keens Koniq, Berlin, 1984.

1 0 Sondang P. Saigain, “Major Changes in Public Administration : The

Indonesian Experience”, Paper presented at informal Constultation on

Changes and Trends in Public Administration and Finance, ESCAP Bangkol,

1979. Also Peter Savang, “Optimism and Pessimism in Comparative

Administration”, Public Administration Review, 36, No. 4, 1978.

RESEARCH PAPER TITLED “HUMAN RESOURCE AND DEVELOPMENT AND THE
ROLE OF BUREAUCRACY” TO BE PRESENTED AT THE EROPA CONFERENCE TO
BE HELD AT BRUNEI ON 13-17 NOV,2006.

BY

MS NAMRATA KOTHARI
SENIOR RESEARCH FELLOW DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE
UNIVERSITY OF CALCUTTA,INDIA
OCTOBER 2006