These days, we seem to love to hate. The Declassified UK website is a typical “scandal-monger” in its focus on wrong-doing. They have just sent me an interesting questionnaire to try to entice me into subscribing which got me thinking of a fascinating book which came out 15 years ago - Thinking Institutionally by Huch Heclo
For whatever reason, trust in our institutions - public and private – has sunk to an all-time low. This is the issue with which Heclo’s book starts – indeed pages 18 onwards give a 5 page spread which itemises the scandals affecting the public, private and even NGO sectors in the last 40-50 years – arguing that mass communications and our interconnectedness exacerbate the public impact of such events.
The
past half-century has been most unkind to those discrete cohering
entities, both formal and informal, that "represent inheritances
of valued purpose with attendant rules and moral obligations."
Today, people almost universally denigrate institutions, including
those of which they are members.
Attacks
on institutions come from our hyper-democratic politics but stem from
the Enlightenment with its unshakeable confidence in human reason;
its subsequent obsessive focus on the self; and, latterly, its belief
that an institution has no value beyond that which an individual can
squeeze from it for personal gain.
In the last 60 years our education system has designated institutions as, at best, annoying encumbrances and, at worst, oppressive tools of the past. Students are taught to believe what they like and express themselves as they see fit. Even people understood to be conservatives—at least in the way we conceptualize political ideology today—assail institutions. Free market economics places a premium on self-interest and assumes institutions stifle innovation and entrepreneurship.
But institutions provide reference points in an uncertain world. They tie us to the past and present; furnish personal assistance; and institutionalize trust. They give our lives purpose and, therefore, the kind of self-satisfaction that only the wholesale rejection of them is supposed to provide.
How,
then, do we protect and promote them? Heclo says that first and
foremost we must learn to think institutionally. This is very
different from thinking about institutions as scholars do. It is not
an objective and intellectual exercise. It is a more participatory
and intuitive one. To think institutionally you need a "particular
sensitivity "to or an "appreciative viewpoint" of
institutions.
To be more specific, the exercise moves our focus away from the self and towards a recognition of our debts and obligations to others.To think institutionally is to do something much more than provide individuals with incentives to be part of and promote institutions. It calls on them to modify their behavior. In this way, Heclo challenges rational choice's assumptions about institutional maintenance vigorously.
I have a lot of sympathy for this line of argument – against “the quick buck”…. instant gratification….. tomorrow’s headlines…..we need cultures which respect timescales for investment and the idea of “stewardship” which Robert Greenleaf tried, unsuccessfully, to cultivate…..The quotation, indeed, which graces the first page of my Dispatches to the post-capitalist generation is from Dwight Eisenhower’s last address in 1960
We
. . . must avoid the impulse to live only for today, plundering for
our own ease and convenience the precious resources of tomorrow. We
cannot mortgage the material assets of our grandchildren without
risking the loss also of their political and spiritual heritage. We
want democracy to survive for all generations to come, not to become
the insolvent phantom of tomorrow.
Heclo is now a retired American political scientist with form for an interest both in political institutions and in European aspects of political culture. I remember his name vividly from the 1970s from the book he wrote jointly with that great doyen of political analysis (and of the budgetary process) Aaron Wildavsky – The Private Government of Public Money. Heclo’s book, I concede, is in the tradition of Edmund Burke and Michael Oakeshott and tended to attract the attention of clerics and university administrators – some of whom produced this interesting symposium
Thinking
institutionally is a lonely pursuit. Its practitioners are
unappreciated and considered naive. They expect to be taken advantage
of by those who care nothing for institutions, only for themselves.
But that does not mean we should not do it.
Readers wanting a sense of Heclo’s writing style are directed to page 731 of The Oxford Handbook of Political Institutions (the link gives the entire “Hand”book!) where Heclo has a short essay on the topic. And google gives some early excerpts from On Thinking Institutionally
