What's representation got to do with it? Comparing public reactions to diversity among government employees and government contractors

IF 2.7 4区 管理学 Q2 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION International Review of Administrative Sciences Pub Date : 2024-05-02 DOI:10.1177/00208523241247453
Keith Baker, Ellen V Rubin, Stephen Weinberg, Christopher T Stout
{"title":"What's representation got to do with it? Comparing public reactions to diversity among government employees and government contractors","authors":"Keith Baker, Ellen V Rubin, Stephen Weinberg, Christopher T Stout","doi":"10.1177/00208523241247453","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The literature on representative bureaucracy is largely focused on government agencies and little attention has been paid to representation within private sector contractors providing services on behalf of government. A survey experiment, administered on a nationally representative panel collected by YouGov, is used to assess whether the public evaluates the distributive justice of government programs differently if the programs are implemented by either contractors or government officials, and whether this changes when the public is provided information on the diversity of those actors. We find that perceptions of distributive justice are no different with government or contractor delivery, nor do they change in response to diversity information. The findings imply that perceptions of distributive justice may only vary between contractors and government, and in response to diversity information, when the public are presented with information about program failure or obvious inequities.Points for practitionersNationally representative survey data indicates that the general public may be more concerned with program failure rather than the demographic composition of the organization that delivers the service. When performance is the same between government and private contractors, the public views the program outcomes as equally fair. Diversity, on its own, is not enough to enhance the public's assessment of government decisions. When engaging with different communities, managers should remember that perceptions of government may be informed by assumptions about who may benefit from government programs and racial stereotypes.","PeriodicalId":47811,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Administrative Sciences","volume":"13 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Review of Administrative Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00208523241247453","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The literature on representative bureaucracy is largely focused on government agencies and little attention has been paid to representation within private sector contractors providing services on behalf of government. A survey experiment, administered on a nationally representative panel collected by YouGov, is used to assess whether the public evaluates the distributive justice of government programs differently if the programs are implemented by either contractors or government officials, and whether this changes when the public is provided information on the diversity of those actors. We find that perceptions of distributive justice are no different with government or contractor delivery, nor do they change in response to diversity information. The findings imply that perceptions of distributive justice may only vary between contractors and government, and in response to diversity information, when the public are presented with information about program failure or obvious inequities.Points for practitionersNationally representative survey data indicates that the general public may be more concerned with program failure rather than the demographic composition of the organization that delivers the service. When performance is the same between government and private contractors, the public views the program outcomes as equally fair. Diversity, on its own, is not enough to enhance the public's assessment of government decisions. When engaging with different communities, managers should remember that perceptions of government may be informed by assumptions about who may benefit from government programs and racial stereotypes.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
代表性有什么关系?比较公众对政府雇员和政府承包商多样性的反应
有关官僚代议制的文献主要集中在政府机构上,很少有人关注代表政府提供服务的私营部门承包商内部的代议制。我们在 YouGov 收集的具有全国代表性的小组中进行了一项调查实验,以评估在政府项目由承包商或政府官员实施的情况下,公众对项目分配公正性的评价是否有所不同,以及在向公众提供有关这些参与者多样性的信息时,这种评价是否会发生变化。我们发现,在政府或承包商实施项目的情况下,公众对分配公正的看法并无不同,也不会因为多样性信息而发生变化。这些研究结果表明,只有当公众获得有关项目失败或明显不公平的信息时,他们对分配公正的看法才会在承包商和政府之间发生变化,并对多样性信息做出反应。当政府和私人承包商的绩效相同时,公众会认为项目结果同样公平。多样性本身并不足以提高公众对政府决策的评价。在与不同社区接触时,管理者应牢记,对政府的看法可能会受到关于谁可能从政府项目中受益的假设和种族成见的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
4.30%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: IRAS is an international peer-reviewed journal devoted to academic and professional public administration. Founded in 1927 it is the oldest scholarly public administration journal specifically focused on comparative and international topics. IRAS seeks to shape the future agenda of public administration around the world by encouraging reflection on international comparisons, new techniques and approaches, the dialogue between academics and practitioners, and debates about the future of the field itself.
期刊最新文献
Is bureaucracy ironclad after all? Prevalence and variances of performance- and strategy-oriented management in German local governments A three-model approach to understand social media-mediated transparency in public administrations Board gender diversity in municipally owned corporations: A resource dependence perspective The autonomy and governance of mutual aid organizations for civil servants’ welfare Administrative reforms in Portugal and Spain: From bureaucracy to digital transition
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1