Much of the literature on the “administration of justice” literature is engrossed with topics that typically concern criminologist, judges, layers and police, and therefore, is absentminded of its own identity and purpose. There is almost no mention of the most common professional staff, i.e. analysts, budget personnel, clinicians, compliance officers, division managers, intake clerks, and the administrative professionals who normally comprise and agency's “administration.” Moreover, there is very little mention of decision-making and functional processes of the “system.” The justice system, therefore, ignores the integral part of the administrative system, non-legal personnel, and the administrative processes, programs and policies that they manage. Additionally, there is literature and studies devoted to the evaluation the individual components of the justice system, i.e. police, courts and corrections. However, there is little devotion to the study and evaluation of the bureaucratic qualities of the justice system. The criminal-justice system, if it can be called a “system,” ignores many of its most basic obligations because of a preoccupation with the arrest, adjudication and correction of offenders. There is more to the administration of justice than the mere consideration of topics that relate to offenders and crime. Moreover, as it currently exists, and is defined by the literature examined, the criminal-justice system is actually a “non-system.” Thus, it is a primary contention of this research that decision-makers and criminal justice scholars ignore the most fundamental and universal principles of administration; consequently, contributing to the degradation of the justice system.