The Bureaucratic Politics of Evaluation: A Case Study of the Department of Labor
研究美国劳工部三个单位在评估《综合就业与培训法案》时无法制定统一计划，揭示官僚立场和职业思维如何影响评估研究，对理解政策执行与评估脱节有启示。
A ccording to Miles' Law, Where you stand depends upon where you sit.' We have all had the experience of suddenly understanding the point of view of previous antagonists when we find ourselves in their shoes. Advocacy inhibits empathy. Space and task thus have psychological properties that can become a basis for bureaucratic politics even if no external non-governmental interests are involved. This story is an illustration of that truth. It is the story of the inability of three units of government within the same department to develop a common plan for the evaluation of the Comprehensive Employment and Training Act (CETA). The Under Secretary of Labor, the Assistant Secretary for Manpower, the Assistant Secretary for Policy, Evaluation and Research, and the Office of Management and Budget all wished such a plan to be developed. The Department of Labor units devoted much effort to collaboration, but in the end, the effort fell short. An explanation may throw light on the difficulty of linking evaluation research to the administration of programs. Too often evaluation research is a program in itself which proceeds quite apart from the implementation of policy.* The thesis of this paper is that attitudes toward knowledge influence bureaucratic behavior. These attitudes, in turn, are derived in part from bureaucratic positions and in part from the professional modes of thought which reside in different governmental roles. Since knowledge is always incomplete and since organization necessarily has a division of labor, a bureaucratic politics of knowledge is inevitable.