How do the professional backgrounds of senior bureaucrats affect their competence and political responsiveness? This article fills a gap by examining these questions in a meritocratic context that accommodates nuanced but potentially consequential variations in the recruitment of senior bureaucrats. Using a paired survey experiment with citizens, representatives, and administrators in Norway, the article demonstrates that agency heads are perceived as less competent and – to a lesser extent – more politically responsive if their profile deviates from the meritocratic ideal of the career civil servant with mission-specific expertise. The article also compares perceptions between groups of stakeholders, filling another gap in the literature. Treatment effects go in the same direction across groups, but the results reveal a mismatch between popular and insider perceptions of bureaucracy: whereas citizens are practically indifferent, administrators are deeply concerned about the competence of an agency head who is a former politician rather than a career bureaucrat. Perceptions of substantive expertise are more aligned: all stakeholder groups view agency heads with mission-specific expertise as more competent and less politically responsive than generalists. Overall, the results demonstrate that variations in who is recruited to senior bureaucrat positions may either strengthen or undermine stakeholders’ views on good governance.
{"title":"The professional profile, competence, and responsiveness of senior bureaucrats: a paired survey experiment with citizens and elite respondents","authors":"Jostein Askim, Tobias Bach, Kristoffer Kolltveit","doi":"10.1093/jopart/muae024","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muae024","url":null,"abstract":"How do the professional backgrounds of senior bureaucrats affect their competence and political responsiveness? This article fills a gap by examining these questions in a meritocratic context that accommodates nuanced but potentially consequential variations in the recruitment of senior bureaucrats. Using a paired survey experiment with citizens, representatives, and administrators in Norway, the article demonstrates that agency heads are perceived as less competent and – to a lesser extent – more politically responsive if their profile deviates from the meritocratic ideal of the career civil servant with mission-specific expertise. The article also compares perceptions between groups of stakeholders, filling another gap in the literature. Treatment effects go in the same direction across groups, but the results reveal a mismatch between popular and insider perceptions of bureaucracy: whereas citizens are practically indifferent, administrators are deeply concerned about the competence of an agency head who is a former politician rather than a career bureaucrat. Perceptions of substantive expertise are more aligned: all stakeholder groups view agency heads with mission-specific expertise as more competent and less politically responsive than generalists. Overall, the results demonstrate that variations in who is recruited to senior bureaucrat positions may either strengthen or undermine stakeholders’ views on good governance.","PeriodicalId":48366,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory","volume":"69 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2024-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142672910","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Jan Boon, Jan Wynen, Koen Verhoest, Walter Daelemans, Jens Lemmens
Despite recurrent observations that media reputations of agencies matter to understand their reform experiences, no studies have theorized and tested the role of sentiment. This study uses novel and advanced BERT language models to detect attributions of responsibility for positive/negative outcomes in media coverage towards 14 Flemish (Belgian) agencies between 2000-2015 through supervised machine learning, and connects these data to the Belgian State Administration Database on the structural reforms these agencies experienced. Our results reflect an inverted U-shaped relationship: more negative reputations increase the reform likelihood of agencies, yet up to a certain point at which the reform likelihood drops again. Variations in positive and neutral reputational signals do not impact the reform likelihood of agencies. Our study contributes to understanding the role of reputation as an antecedent of structural reforms. Complementing and enriching existing perspectives, the paper shows how the sentiment in reputational signals accumulates and informs political-administrative decision-makers to engage in structural reforms.
尽管经常观察到媒体对机构声誉的报道对了解其改革经验很重要，但还没有研究对情感的作用进行理论分析和测试。本研究使用新颖、先进的 BERT 语言模型，通过监督机器学习检测 2000-2015 年间媒体对 14 个佛兰德（比利时）机构报道中正面/负面结果的责任归属，并将这些数据与比利时国家行政机构数据库中有关这些机构所经历的结构性改革的数据连接起来。我们的结果反映了一种倒 U 型关系：负面声誉越多，机构改革的可能性就越大，但到了一定程度，改革的可能性又会下降。正面和中性声誉信号的变化不会影响机构改革的可能性。我们的研究有助于理解声誉作为结构改革先决条件的作用。作为对现有观点的补充和丰富，本文展示了声誉信号中的情绪是如何累积起来并影响政治-行政决策者进行结构改革的。
{"title":"A reputational perspective on structural reforms: How media reputations are related to the structural reform likelihood of public agencies","authors":"Jan Boon, Jan Wynen, Koen Verhoest, Walter Daelemans, Jens Lemmens","doi":"10.1093/jopart/muae023","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muae023","url":null,"abstract":"Despite recurrent observations that media reputations of agencies matter to understand their reform experiences, no studies have theorized and tested the role of sentiment. This study uses novel and advanced BERT language models to detect attributions of responsibility for positive/negative outcomes in media coverage towards 14 Flemish (Belgian) agencies between 2000-2015 through supervised machine learning, and connects these data to the Belgian State Administration Database on the structural reforms these agencies experienced. Our results reflect an inverted U-shaped relationship: more negative reputations increase the reform likelihood of agencies, yet up to a certain point at which the reform likelihood drops again. Variations in positive and neutral reputational signals do not impact the reform likelihood of agencies. Our study contributes to understanding the role of reputation as an antecedent of structural reforms. Complementing and enriching existing perspectives, the paper shows how the sentiment in reputational signals accumulates and informs political-administrative decision-makers to engage in structural reforms.","PeriodicalId":48366,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory","volume":"35 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2024-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142642560","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Among the general public as well as in the scientific literature, administrative work is widely associated with heavy bureaucratic procedures that are disconnected from serving clients. Less is said and written about the importance of administrative work in delivering public service. Drawing on a relational theoretical approach and based on an ethnographic field study in two municipal child welfare units in Denmark (including 38 days of observations and 30 interviews), this study shows how administrative work plays three key functions in various accountability relations, and that these functions aid street-level bureaucrats in mastering the complexities of their work. The study offers a theoretical framework that delineates the functions of administrative work in complex street-level practice. By demonstrating how administrative work may contribute positively to fulfilling the purposes of street-level work, this study contributes to developing our understanding of administrative work as an invaluable part of street-level work and provides a more nuanced foundation for future studies on the virtues and issues of administrative work.
{"title":"Making Administrative Work Matter in Public Service Delivery: A Lens for Linking Practice with the Purpose of Office","authors":"Kirstine Karmsteen","doi":"10.1093/jopart/muae022","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muae022","url":null,"abstract":"Among the general public as well as in the scientific literature, administrative work is widely associated with heavy bureaucratic procedures that are disconnected from serving clients. Less is said and written about the importance of administrative work in delivering public service. Drawing on a relational theoretical approach and based on an ethnographic field study in two municipal child welfare units in Denmark (including 38 days of observations and 30 interviews), this study shows how administrative work plays three key functions in various accountability relations, and that these functions aid street-level bureaucrats in mastering the complexities of their work. The study offers a theoretical framework that delineates the functions of administrative work in complex street-level practice. By demonstrating how administrative work may contribute positively to fulfilling the purposes of street-level work, this study contributes to developing our understanding of administrative work as an invaluable part of street-level work and provides a more nuanced foundation for future studies on the virtues and issues of administrative work.","PeriodicalId":48366,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory","volume":"8 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2024-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142574372","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Gendered burdens are experiences of coercive and controlling state actions that directly regulate gendered bodies, labor, and identity. It’s not simply about preventing access to rights and benefits, it’s about control and coercion. Gendered burdens generate gender inequality through four mechanisms. First, administrative burdens regulate reproductive bodies, legitimating the state’s direct control over reproductive health care, including abortions, with consequent implications for peoples’ health. Second, burdens require reproductive labor, shifting unpaid and underpaid reproductive labor onto women as the policies that support such labor tend to have high administrative burden that impede access. Third, gendered burdens restrict reproductive labor, impeding the right to provide such care labor with dignity, by exerting control over how, and sometimes whether, care is performed, including in rights-granting venues, like redistributive benefits, and rights-depriving venues, like the supervision of families by child protective services. Fourth, burdens regulate gendered identities, reinforcing heteronormative and cis-normative constructions of gender, including by directly controlling gender identification. While gendered burdens are not only experienced by women, they are most strongly applied to poor and racially marginalized groups of women. These claims provide a basis for public administration scholarship to connect with feminist theory by illustrating the centrality of administrative processes and related experiences to structural patterns of inequality.
{"title":"Gendered Administrative Burden: Regulating Gendered Bodies, Labor, and Identity","authors":"Pamela Herd, Donald Moynihan","doi":"10.1093/jopart/muae021","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muae021","url":null,"abstract":"Gendered burdens are experiences of coercive and controlling state actions that directly regulate gendered bodies, labor, and identity. It’s not simply about preventing access to rights and benefits, it’s about control and coercion. Gendered burdens generate gender inequality through four mechanisms. First, administrative burdens regulate reproductive bodies, legitimating the state’s direct control over reproductive health care, including abortions, with consequent implications for peoples’ health. Second, burdens require reproductive labor, shifting unpaid and underpaid reproductive labor onto women as the policies that support such labor tend to have high administrative burden that impede access. Third, gendered burdens restrict reproductive labor, impeding the right to provide such care labor with dignity, by exerting control over how, and sometimes whether, care is performed, including in rights-granting venues, like redistributive benefits, and rights-depriving venues, like the supervision of families by child protective services. Fourth, burdens regulate gendered identities, reinforcing heteronormative and cis-normative constructions of gender, including by directly controlling gender identification. While gendered burdens are not only experienced by women, they are most strongly applied to poor and racially marginalized groups of women. These claims provide a basis for public administration scholarship to connect with feminist theory by illustrating the centrality of administrative processes and related experiences to structural patterns of inequality.","PeriodicalId":48366,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory","volume":"25 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2024-10-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142488740","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
As the bureaucratic policymaking process has frequently deviated from conventional procedures contemplated by administrative law statutes, recent research suggests that bureaucrats strategically use rulemaking procedures to pursue their own goals and circumvent political interventions. However, the literature has often neglected implementation issues that bureaucrats confront in the policymaking process. Building on a bureaucratic reputation perspective that explicitly recognizes bureaucrats’ concern for implementation failure and reputational damage, this study examines when and why U.S. federal agencies issue rules without prior notice and comment instead of proposing rules through the conventional notice-and-comment process. Using logistic regressions with fixed effects, based on over 16,000 rules published between 2000 and 2020, we find that agencies are more likely to solicit prior public comment when making more complex and stringent rules. However, they tend to bypass it when making new rules and joint rules with other agencies. This study also shows that the positive effect of rule stringency on agencies’ use of the conventional notice-and-comment process tends to be more pronounced in agencies with higher proportions of professional bureaucrats. Overall, our findings indicate that bureaucrats’ choices of rulemaking procedures might be shaped by their incentives to prevent implementation failure and preserve agency reputation, which can be compatible with the norms of democratic governance.
{"title":"Procedural Politicking for What? Bureaucratic Reputation and Democratic Governance","authors":"Joohyung Park","doi":"10.1093/jopart/muae020","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muae020","url":null,"abstract":"As the bureaucratic policymaking process has frequently deviated from conventional procedures contemplated by administrative law statutes, recent research suggests that bureaucrats strategically use rulemaking procedures to pursue their own goals and circumvent political interventions. However, the literature has often neglected implementation issues that bureaucrats confront in the policymaking process. Building on a bureaucratic reputation perspective that explicitly recognizes bureaucrats’ concern for implementation failure and reputational damage, this study examines when and why U.S. federal agencies issue rules without prior notice and comment instead of proposing rules through the conventional notice-and-comment process. Using logistic regressions with fixed effects, based on over 16,000 rules published between 2000 and 2020, we find that agencies are more likely to solicit prior public comment when making more complex and stringent rules. However, they tend to bypass it when making new rules and joint rules with other agencies. This study also shows that the positive effect of rule stringency on agencies’ use of the conventional notice-and-comment process tends to be more pronounced in agencies with higher proportions of professional bureaucrats. Overall, our findings indicate that bureaucrats’ choices of rulemaking procedures might be shaped by their incentives to prevent implementation failure and preserve agency reputation, which can be compatible with the norms of democratic governance.","PeriodicalId":48366,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory","volume":"58 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2024-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142386283","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Demands for greater quality of public services and enhanced efficiency have intensified changes in public organizations. Not surprisingly, these organizations are increasingly searching for new and useful ideas, including disruptive ones, to meet current demands. Whereas previous studies on team radical creativity have focused on the influence that subordinates’ trust in the supervisor has on this type of creativity, this work innovates by testing the leader's trust in the team as an antecedent. Drawing on Self-Determination Theory, we further add to knowledge by considering the mediating role of team perceived organizational support for creativity and the moderating role of team collaborative climate. The research model was tested with a sample of 228 teams from public organizations with data collected from two sources at three moments in time. We found that the leader's trust in the team has a direct positive relationship with team radical creativity and an indirect positive relationship with creativity via team perceived organizational support. We also observed that team collaborative climate positively moderates the relationship between the leader's trust in the team and team radical creativity. These results deliver meaningful theoretical and practical insights into how organizations, especially public ones, can improve team creativity and thus enhance organizational performance.
{"title":"Will trust move mountains? Fostering radical ideas in public organizations","authors":"Raimundo Avilton Meneses Junior, Filipe Jorge Fernandes Coelho, Isabel Dórdio Dimas","doi":"10.1093/jopart/muae019","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muae019","url":null,"abstract":"Demands for greater quality of public services and enhanced efficiency have intensified changes in public organizations. Not surprisingly, these organizations are increasingly searching for new and useful ideas, including disruptive ones, to meet current demands. Whereas previous studies on team radical creativity have focused on the influence that subordinates’ trust in the supervisor has on this type of creativity, this work innovates by testing the leader's trust in the team as an antecedent. Drawing on Self-Determination Theory, we further add to knowledge by considering the mediating role of team perceived organizational support for creativity and the moderating role of team collaborative climate. The research model was tested with a sample of 228 teams from public organizations with data collected from two sources at three moments in time. We found that the leader's trust in the team has a direct positive relationship with team radical creativity and an indirect positive relationship with creativity via team perceived organizational support. We also observed that team collaborative climate positively moderates the relationship between the leader's trust in the team and team radical creativity. These results deliver meaningful theoretical and practical insights into how organizations, especially public ones, can improve team creativity and thus enhance organizational performance.","PeriodicalId":48366,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory","volume":"21 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2024-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142313604","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Stephan Grimmelikhuijsen, Marija Aleksovska, Judith van Erp, Sharon Gilad, Libby Maman, Tobias Bach, Moritz Kappler, Wouter Van Dooren, Rahel M Schomaker, Heidi Houlberg Salomonsen
Establishing and maintaining citizen trust is vital for the effectiveness and long-term viability of regulatory agencies. However, limited empirical research has been conducted on the relationship between regulatory action and citizen trust. This article addresses this gap by investigating the influence of various regulatory enforcement styles on citizen trust. We conducted a pre-registered and representative survey experiment in six countries (n=5765): Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Israel, the Netherlands, and Norway. Our study focuses on three key dimensions of enforcement style: formalism, coerciveness, and accommodation. We hypothesize that a strict and punitive enforcement style with minimal accommodation will enhance citizen trust. Surprisingly, we found no overall effect of enforcement on trust. However, specifically high levels of formalism (strictness) and coerciveness (punitiveness) exhibited a small positive effect on trust. Furthermore, we observed no discernible impact of an accommodative enforcement style. Additional analyses revealed that the effects of enforcement style were not consistent across country and regulatory domains. This suggests we need to reconsider assumptions underlying enforcement theory, as our findings imply that public trust seems less conditional on heavy-handed enforcement than initially anticipated.
{"title":"Does enforcement style influence citizen trust in regulatory agencies? An experiment in six countries","authors":"Stephan Grimmelikhuijsen, Marija Aleksovska, Judith van Erp, Sharon Gilad, Libby Maman, Tobias Bach, Moritz Kappler, Wouter Van Dooren, Rahel M Schomaker, Heidi Houlberg Salomonsen","doi":"10.1093/jopart/muae018","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muae018","url":null,"abstract":"Establishing and maintaining citizen trust is vital for the effectiveness and long-term viability of regulatory agencies. However, limited empirical research has been conducted on the relationship between regulatory action and citizen trust. This article addresses this gap by investigating the influence of various regulatory enforcement styles on citizen trust. We conducted a pre-registered and representative survey experiment in six countries (n=5765): Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Israel, the Netherlands, and Norway. Our study focuses on three key dimensions of enforcement style: formalism, coerciveness, and accommodation. We hypothesize that a strict and punitive enforcement style with minimal accommodation will enhance citizen trust. Surprisingly, we found no overall effect of enforcement on trust. However, specifically high levels of formalism (strictness) and coerciveness (punitiveness) exhibited a small positive effect on trust. Furthermore, we observed no discernible impact of an accommodative enforcement style. Additional analyses revealed that the effects of enforcement style were not consistent across country and regulatory domains. This suggests we need to reconsider assumptions underlying enforcement theory, as our findings imply that public trust seems less conditional on heavy-handed enforcement than initially anticipated.","PeriodicalId":48366,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory","volume":"30 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2024-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142236831","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Representative bureaucracy theory has mainly been used to understand how identities related to race, ethnicity, and gender influence how bureaucrats administer public services. Although representation through lived experience has expanded the scope of the theory, this theoretical thread has mostly focused on the perspectives of management. The purpose of this article is to employ lived experience representative bureaucracy theory to understand the influence of first responders’ experiences with substance use disorder (drug addiction) on their viewpoints regarding the humanness and deservingness of clients with opioid use disorder. We analyze data from a survey of emergency medical services (EMS)-providers and police officers in the United States (N = 3,500) with ordinary least squares regression and Hayes’ PROCESS macro to test for mediation. Results show that indirect and direct lived experiences—respectively, having a family member or friend who has experienced addiction and believing addiction has had a direct impact on respondents’ lives—predict increases in client deservingness, mediated by ascribed humanness and driven largely by EMS-providers. However, responding to opioid overdoses—an on-the-job lived experience—is associated with reduced deservingness and ascribed humanness. The study adds to the literature by expanding representative bureaucracy theory beyond race, ethnicity, and gender; broadening representation through lived experience beyond a focus on managers to include street-level bureaucrats; and incorporating concepts from social and political psychology that have yet to be integrated into representative bureaucracy studies.
代议制理论主要用于理解与种族、民族和性别有关的身份如何影响官僚如何管理公共服务。虽然通过生活经验的代表性扩大了该理论的范围，但这一理论线索主要集中在管理视角上。本文旨在运用生活经验代表官僚制理论，了解急救人员的药物使用障碍（吸毒成瘾）经历对其关于阿片类药物使用障碍患者的人性和应得性观点的影响。我们利用普通最小二乘法回归和 Hayes 的 PROCESS 宏，分析了对美国紧急医疗服务（EMS）提供者和警官（N = 3,500 ）的调查数据，以检验中介作用。结果表明，间接和直接的生活经历--即有家人或朋友经历过吸毒成瘾，以及认为吸毒成瘾对受访者的生活产生了直接影响--可以预测受访者应得感的增加，而这主要是由 "人性 "中介的，并主要由急救服务提供者驱动。然而，应对阿片类药物过量--一种在职生活经历--与应得性和归因人性的降低有关。本研究将代表性官僚制理论扩展到了种族、民族和性别之外，通过生活经验扩大了代表性官僚制的范围，从关注管理者扩展到了街道一级的官僚，并纳入了社会和政治心理学中尚未纳入代表性官僚制研究的概念，从而为相关文献增添了新的内容。
{"title":"Deservingness, humanness, and representation through lived experience: analyzing first responders’ attitudes","authors":"Ryan J Lofaro, Alka Sapat","doi":"10.1093/jopart/muae015","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muae015","url":null,"abstract":"Representative bureaucracy theory has mainly been used to understand how identities related to race, ethnicity, and gender influence how bureaucrats administer public services. Although representation through lived experience has expanded the scope of the theory, this theoretical thread has mostly focused on the perspectives of management. The purpose of this article is to employ lived experience representative bureaucracy theory to understand the influence of first responders’ experiences with substance use disorder (drug addiction) on their viewpoints regarding the humanness and deservingness of clients with opioid use disorder. We analyze data from a survey of emergency medical services (EMS)-providers and police officers in the United States (N = 3,500) with ordinary least squares regression and Hayes’ PROCESS macro to test for mediation. Results show that indirect and direct lived experiences—respectively, having a family member or friend who has experienced addiction and believing addiction has had a direct impact on respondents’ lives—predict increases in client deservingness, mediated by ascribed humanness and driven largely by EMS-providers. However, responding to opioid overdoses—an on-the-job lived experience—is associated with reduced deservingness and ascribed humanness. The study adds to the literature by expanding representative bureaucracy theory beyond race, ethnicity, and gender; broadening representation through lived experience beyond a focus on managers to include street-level bureaucrats; and incorporating concepts from social and political psychology that have yet to be integrated into representative bureaucracy studies.","PeriodicalId":48366,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory","volume":"37 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2024-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142042353","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The literature on administrative burden has focused on cognitive, material, and social resources, leaving emotional strategies and processes largely unexplored. This study begins to address this research gap by elaborating Illouz’ (2007) concept of emotional capital in the context of citizen agency. The article uses the concept emotional capital to analyze claimant anger in response to administrative burdens examining the question: how do citizens understand and maneuver the potential benefits and risks of expressing their anger when experiencing administrative burdens? The article is based on ethnographic fieldwork in Danish job centers involving interviews with 71 claimants and observations of 10 conversations between caseworkers and claimants. The article contributes to theorize the role of emotions in citizen-state encounters by showing that emotional capital works as a resource moderating the experience of and coping with administrative burden
{"title":"Emotional capital in citizen agency: Contesting administrative burden through anger","authors":"Merete Monrad","doi":"10.1093/jopart/muae017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muae017","url":null,"abstract":"The literature on administrative burden has focused on cognitive, material, and social resources, leaving emotional strategies and processes largely unexplored. This study begins to address this research gap by elaborating Illouz’ (2007) concept of emotional capital in the context of citizen agency. The article uses the concept emotional capital to analyze claimant anger in response to administrative burdens examining the question: how do citizens understand and maneuver the potential benefits and risks of expressing their anger when experiencing administrative burdens? The article is based on ethnographic fieldwork in Danish job centers involving interviews with 71 claimants and observations of 10 conversations between caseworkers and claimants. The article contributes to theorize the role of emotions in citizen-state encounters by showing that emotional capital works as a resource moderating the experience of and coping with administrative burden","PeriodicalId":48366,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory","volume":"25 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2024-08-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141994506","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Francesca P Vantaggiato, Zuzana Murdoch, Hussein Kassim, Benny Geys, Sara Connolly
Programmes to encourage staff to move within public sector organizations have become increasingly widespread in recent decades. Yet, although there are some anecdotal accounts, the effects of such intra-organizational mobility remain largely unexplored. Building on insights from organization theory and social psychology, we argue that intra-organizational mobility entails an important trade-off: it undermines movers’ depth of work-related contacts within the (new) department, while it increases the breadth of their work-related contacts outside it. Our empirical analysis evaluates this trade-off using a two-way fixed effects model for a longitudinal dataset of movers (N=149) and stayers (N=473) across two survey waves among European Commission officials in 2014 and 2018. Our main findings confirm that intra-organizational mobility is connected in opposing ways to employees’ intra- and extra-departmental work-related contact patterns. In line with theoretical expectations, we find these relationships to be stronger for employees who have previously experienced intra-organizational moves (‘repeat-movers’).
{"title":"Intra-organizational Mobility and Employees’ Work-related Contact Patterns: Evidence from Panel Data in the European Commission","authors":"Francesca P Vantaggiato, Zuzana Murdoch, Hussein Kassim, Benny Geys, Sara Connolly","doi":"10.1093/jopart/muae014","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muae014","url":null,"abstract":"Programmes to encourage staff to move within public sector organizations have become increasingly widespread in recent decades. Yet, although there are some anecdotal accounts, the effects of such intra-organizational mobility remain largely unexplored. Building on insights from organization theory and social psychology, we argue that intra-organizational mobility entails an important trade-off: it undermines movers’ depth of work-related contacts within the (new) department, while it increases the breadth of their work-related contacts outside it. Our empirical analysis evaluates this trade-off using a two-way fixed effects model for a longitudinal dataset of movers (N=149) and stayers (N=473) across two survey waves among European Commission officials in 2014 and 2018. Our main findings confirm that intra-organizational mobility is connected in opposing ways to employees’ intra- and extra-departmental work-related contact patterns. In line with theoretical expectations, we find these relationships to be stronger for employees who have previously experienced intra-organizational moves (‘repeat-movers’).","PeriodicalId":48366,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory","volume":"25 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141495728","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：