The traditional form of hearing is an adversary trial-type process, which meets some predicaments when it is transplanted to the administrative process. It makes a trap that the formal hearing is an adversary trial-type one, which cannot fit in with different kind of administrative tasks. This study finds two ideal pure types of hearing procedure: case-deciding and policy-making. It is a reciprocal communication in adjudication hearing process, while a communication with common aims in policy making hearing process. There are two sets of characteristics of these ideal types: simplicity and diversity, defensiveness and constructiveness. The different functions between case-deciding type of hearing and policy-making type of hearing lead to the divergence of their procedures.