The advocates of integration point out that integration help co-ordination whereas disintegration leads to conflicts. The pressure and interest groups try to capture independent agencies for their selfish ends. If they are integrated under a common constitutional head like American President they can be freed from the influence of dishonest and corrupt persons. The critics of integration, on the other hand, allege that the President may become a dictator if his already great powers are enhanced by bringing independent organizations under his control. The danger of possible dictatorship would result into loss of individual liberty and democracy one day or the other. Secondly, the functional groups like educationists in the universities and social welfare workers who enjoy independent and autonomous status oppose integration. They fear that their freedom which is essential for their successful functioning will be threatened under integrated system of administration.
Unlike America, India has inherited the integrated system of administration from the past British rule. We have a parliamentary system with a responsible government. As such there in no fear of the executive becoming dictatorial due to increase in its powers. By and large, the theorists of the discipline of Public Administration are in favour of integrated and not disintegrated system. They pled that integration should be the rule and autonomous organization which lead to disintegration should be the exception. Our administration based on this principle only certain institutions like universities and professional bodies are given autonomous powers. Sometimes there are complaints that these bodies which are captured by certain vested interests grossly misuse their autonomy. Then government has tried to reform them by passing new bills in the legislature in order to tighten its control over them. In this way, government can correct the defects inherent in the disintegrated administrative system.