{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.032852564102564104, 'fraction_numerical': 0.00641025641025641, 'mean_word_length': 5.71505376344086, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Introduction: Phenomenology and Governance The Administrative Situation

The study of administration is often viewed as training experts or technicians to effectively and efficiently produce preconceived outputs often through measurement, which explains the term “manhole cover counters” (McSwite, 2002). And yet, administrative problems can feel lonely and “wicked” rather than routine or clear (Hummel, 1981). Furthermore, situations are unique, complex, and subject to multiple interpretations interspersed with competing values and interests. Not surprisingly, outcomes rarely meet expectations, nor do the perceptions of administration for that matter. To some practicing administrators, none of this is news and rather obvious. Yet, because of underlying epistemological traditions, we continue to seek clear cause-and-effect relationships, general rules, and best ways. This symposium takes a different approach. All of the authors start from the position that administration is more a matter of continuous learning, interpretation, and feel than hard science. In this sense, we recognize an existing gap in the literature and work to flesh these ideas out. We see administrative problems as situation-specific, contextual, and debatable. No