One of the outcomes of these contextual forces was that, from the beginning, students of administration adopted efficiency as their guiding principle. The term was vaguely defined, though “efficient administration” clearly meant “good administration.” When administration scholars operationalized the concept, they mainly seemed to be talking about an input-output ratio, the most output for the least input being the implied objective (Waldo 1948, 201–202). A “good” decision or administrative act was thus one that maximized outputs for a given set of inputs. As Waldo pointed out, this is a concept fundamental to businesses operating in capitalistic markets, but it is not nearly so important to democratic government. Equity, consensus, or the satisfaction of particular interests is frequently the criterion for action in democratic processes, and none of these criteria are necessarily efficient; indeed, they are often inescapably inefficient.