Transparency has often been hailed as a golden tool to bolster citizens’ trust in government and improve public governance. However, there is a considerable disparity in theoretical reasoning and empirical findings. Through a meta-analysis of 49 studies with 436 effect sizes, this study provides novel perspectives for understanding the effect of transparency on citizens’ trust in government. To test these mechanisms, we draw on various social science theories such as agency theory, deliberative democracy theory, procedural justice theory, a disappointment effect view, and a misinformation/information overload view. The meta-analysis indicates that the overall effect of transparency on trust is positive and significant, with an average effect size being 0.13 points. The meta-regression results further show that the impact of transparency on trust is negatively moderated by computer-mediated transparency and decision-making transparency, and it varies in a non-linear pattern with the level and the color of transparency. The findings from this paper advance the theoretical development of the contextual conditions under which transparency may or may not lead to more trust in government. They also suggest helpful strategies for governments to foster a trusting relationship with their citizens.
{"title":"Can Sunlight Disperse Mistrust? A Meta-Analysis of the Effect of Transparency on Citizens’ Trust in Government","authors":"Qiushi Wang, Zhenghui Guan","doi":"10.1093/jopart/muac040","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muac040","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Transparency has often been hailed as a golden tool to bolster citizens’ trust in government and improve public governance. However, there is a considerable disparity in theoretical reasoning and empirical findings. Through a meta-analysis of 49 studies with 436 effect sizes, this study provides novel perspectives for understanding the effect of transparency on citizens’ trust in government. To test these mechanisms, we draw on various social science theories such as agency theory, deliberative democracy theory, procedural justice theory, a disappointment effect view, and a misinformation/information overload view. The meta-analysis indicates that the overall effect of transparency on trust is positive and significant, with an average effect size being 0.13 points. The meta-regression results further show that the impact of transparency on trust is negatively moderated by computer-mediated transparency and decision-making transparency, and it varies in a non-linear pattern with the level and the color of transparency. The findings from this paper advance the theoretical development of the contextual conditions under which transparency may or may not lead to more trust in government. They also suggest helpful strategies for governments to foster a trusting relationship with their citizens.","PeriodicalId":48366,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2022-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44282821","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}
Performance information use is an essential component of performance management, which is an important tool to manage purpose-oriented networks (PONs). Conceptualizing performance information use in PONs as network members’ presentation, discussion, and interpretation of performance information during their interactions and communication, this study explores its drivers. Extant studies on performance information use in PONs point out an association between its use and the relationships among network members, but they lack specificity regarding the association. This study focuses on and theorizes that association, relying on network theory (especially the embeddedness approach) and resource dependence theory. Network analysis techniques (Multiple Regression Quadratic Assignment Procedure and Exponential Random Graph Modeling) are applied to investigate the theory empirically, using a pair (dyad) of network members as the unit of analysis. The data were collected from 21 members in a health and human services network serving children and youth with serious emotional disturbance in a U.S. county. Two types of performance information were used in the PON: internally and externally produced information. Despite differences in the breadth and decision-making relevance of using information from these two sources, network analyses identify three relational characteristics consistently associated with the dyads’ use of internal and external performance information: (1) frequency of communication; (2) centrality of position; and (3) extent of mutual dependency. These findings suggest that network members are likely to use performance information in relationships where the benefits of developing a shared understanding of network performance outweigh the costs of using it.
{"title":"Performance information use in a purpose-oriented network: A relational perspective","authors":"Mana Nakashima","doi":"10.1093/jopart/muac039","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muac039","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Performance information use is an essential component of performance management, which is an important tool to manage purpose-oriented networks (PONs). Conceptualizing performance information use in PONs as network members’ presentation, discussion, and interpretation of performance information during their interactions and communication, this study explores its drivers. Extant studies on performance information use in PONs point out an association between its use and the relationships among network members, but they lack specificity regarding the association. This study focuses on and theorizes that association, relying on network theory (especially the embeddedness approach) and resource dependence theory. Network analysis techniques (Multiple Regression Quadratic Assignment Procedure and Exponential Random Graph Modeling) are applied to investigate the theory empirically, using a pair (dyad) of network members as the unit of analysis. The data were collected from 21 members in a health and human services network serving children and youth with serious emotional disturbance in a U.S. county. Two types of performance information were used in the PON: internally and externally produced information. Despite differences in the breadth and decision-making relevance of using information from these two sources, network analyses identify three relational characteristics consistently associated with the dyads’ use of internal and external performance information: (1) frequency of communication; (2) centrality of position; and (3) extent of mutual dependency. These findings suggest that network members are likely to use performance information in relationships where the benefits of developing a shared understanding of network performance outweigh the costs of using it.","PeriodicalId":48366,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2022-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48272678","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}
Flexibility in administrative crisis management is a frequently reported determinant for a successful crisis response. But there is little agreement about how to conceptualize, measure and explain flexibility. We use a three-dimensional measure of administrative flexibility, capturing employees’ decision leeway, staff mobility, and organizational innovation in a crisis response. We then develop and test an explanation of variation in flexibility, focusing on the refugee crisis of 2015/16 in Germany and analyzing survey and socio-economic data from 235 districts using linear regression analysis. The main finding is that differences in flexibility cannot be explained by the scope of the crisis in a district, but by organizational factors: Agencies with politically unconstrained leadership, with higher financial resources and more crisis-related experience, respond more flexible. These findings contribute to theorizing and explaining administrative flexibility in and beyond crisis management and have practical implications for crisis learning and preparation.
{"title":"Conceptualizing and explaining flexibility in administrative crisis management – a cross-district analysis in Germany","authors":"A. Lenz, Steffen Eckhard","doi":"10.1093/jopart/muac038","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muac038","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Flexibility in administrative crisis management is a frequently reported determinant for a successful crisis response. But there is little agreement about how to conceptualize, measure and explain flexibility. We use a three-dimensional measure of administrative flexibility, capturing employees’ decision leeway, staff mobility, and organizational innovation in a crisis response. We then develop and test an explanation of variation in flexibility, focusing on the refugee crisis of 2015/16 in Germany and analyzing survey and socio-economic data from 235 districts using linear regression analysis. The main finding is that differences in flexibility cannot be explained by the scope of the crisis in a district, but by organizational factors: Agencies with politically unconstrained leadership, with higher financial resources and more crisis-related experience, respond more flexible. These findings contribute to theorizing and explaining administrative flexibility in and beyond crisis management and have practical implications for crisis learning and preparation.","PeriodicalId":48366,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2022-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43180662","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}
M. Compton, Matthew M. Young, Justin B. Bullock, R. Greer
Scholars have long recognized the role of race and ethnicity in shaping the development and design of policy institutions in the United States, including social welfare policy. Beyond influencing the design of policy institutions, administrative discretion can disadvantage marginalized clientele in policy implementation. Building on previous work on street-level bureaucracy, administrative discretion, and administrative burden, we offer a theory of racialized administrative errors and we examine whether automation mitigates the adverse administrative outcomes experienced by clientele of color. We build on recent work examining the role of technological and administrative complexity in shaping the incidence of administrative errors, and test our theory of racialized administrative errors with claim-level administrative data from 53 US unemployment insurance programs, from 2002-2018. Using logistic regression, we find evidence of systematic differences by claimant race and ethnicity in the odds of a state workforce agency making an error when processing Unemployment Insurance claims. Our analysis suggests that non-white claimants are more likely to be affected by agency errors that result in underpayment of benefits than white claimants. We also find that automated state-client interactions reduce the likelihood of administrative errors for all groups compared to face-to-face interactions, including Black and Hispanic clientele, but some disparities persist.
{"title":"Administrative Errors and Race: Can technology mitigate inequitable administrative outcomes?","authors":"M. Compton, Matthew M. Young, Justin B. Bullock, R. Greer","doi":"10.1093/jopart/muac036","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muac036","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Scholars have long recognized the role of race and ethnicity in shaping the development and design of policy institutions in the United States, including social welfare policy. Beyond influencing the design of policy institutions, administrative discretion can disadvantage marginalized clientele in policy implementation. Building on previous work on street-level bureaucracy, administrative discretion, and administrative burden, we offer a theory of racialized administrative errors and we examine whether automation mitigates the adverse administrative outcomes experienced by clientele of color. We build on recent work examining the role of technological and administrative complexity in shaping the incidence of administrative errors, and test our theory of racialized administrative errors with claim-level administrative data from 53 US unemployment insurance programs, from 2002-2018. Using logistic regression, we find evidence of systematic differences by claimant race and ethnicity in the odds of a state workforce agency making an error when processing Unemployment Insurance claims. Our analysis suggests that non-white claimants are more likely to be affected by agency errors that result in underpayment of benefits than white claimants. We also find that automated state-client interactions reduce the likelihood of administrative errors for all groups compared to face-to-face interactions, including Black and Hispanic clientele, but some disparities persist.","PeriodicalId":48366,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45366271","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}
Environmental collaboration has become an increasingly common approach to the management of natural resources. Scholars and practitioners have tried to understand how collaborative structures impact performance using a multitude of single case studies and comparative studies. However, despite calls for the evaluation of collaborative performance, little quantitative research exists that explores the connections between collaborative structures and performance using a large sample for analysis. We address this gap by carrying out fixed effects analysis that examines the impact of several structural variations, including collaboration form, number and representational diversity of participants, and contributions of in-kind resources, on the cost-effectiveness of collaborative watershed projects in Oregon. The data for this project come from the Oregon Watershed Restoration Inventory (OWRI). Our results indicate that collaboration form, participant numbers, and resource contributions affect cost-effectiveness, but representational diversity among participants does not. The findings from this paper can help sponsoring and implementing agencies execute collaborative projects more cost-effectively. They also indicate the need for additional research exploring the relationship between collaborative structures, outputs, and outcomes.
{"title":"Saving the Salmon: Examining the Cost-Effectiveness of Collaboration in Oregon","authors":"Qasim S. Mehdi, Tina Nabatchi","doi":"10.1093/jopart/muac037","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muac037","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Environmental collaboration has become an increasingly common approach to the management of natural resources. Scholars and practitioners have tried to understand how collaborative structures impact performance using a multitude of single case studies and comparative studies. However, despite calls for the evaluation of collaborative performance, little quantitative research exists that explores the connections between collaborative structures and performance using a large sample for analysis. We address this gap by carrying out fixed effects analysis that examines the impact of several structural variations, including collaboration form, number and representational diversity of participants, and contributions of in-kind resources, on the cost-effectiveness of collaborative watershed projects in Oregon. The data for this project come from the Oregon Watershed Restoration Inventory (OWRI). Our results indicate that collaboration form, participant numbers, and resource contributions affect cost-effectiveness, but representational diversity among participants does not. The findings from this paper can help sponsoring and implementing agencies execute collaborative projects more cost-effectively. They also indicate the need for additional research exploring the relationship between collaborative structures, outputs, and outcomes.","PeriodicalId":48366,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2022-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42039726","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}
{"title":"Correction to: Why Are Counterfactual Assessment Methods Not Widespread in Outcome-Based Contracts? A Formal Model Approach","authors":"","doi":"10.1093/jopart/muac035","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muac035","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":48366,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2022-08-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42670613","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}
Jason A. Grissom, Jennifer Darling-Aduana, Richard Hall
A large body of research shows that clients of government services benefit from the presence of bureaucrats with whom they share race or ethnicity. These benefits arise from active or symbolic representation, which scholars argue are grounded in the shared backgrounds, language, and values that race and ethnicity proxy. We suggest that these shared connections are likely to be even more salient for clients and bureaucrats who share not just the same ethnicity but the same country of origin, and we look for evidence of representation based on country of origin in the context of public schools. Leveraging administrative and survey data from Miami-Dade County Public Schools, the fourth-largest school district in the United States, we employ regression models with school-by-year fixed effects to test for differences in test scores for students taught by a teacher with the same country of origin relative to similar students taught by other-origin teachers in the same school in the same year. We find that immigrant students with origin-matched teachers score modestly higher than their non-matched peers in both math and reading. These increases are most apparent among low-income students and those who are English learners. Patterns vary by immigrant students’ origin country.
{"title":"Country of Origin and Representative Bureaucracy","authors":"Jason A. Grissom, Jennifer Darling-Aduana, Richard Hall","doi":"10.1093/jopart/muac034","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muac034","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 A large body of research shows that clients of government services benefit from the presence of bureaucrats with whom they share race or ethnicity. These benefits arise from active or symbolic representation, which scholars argue are grounded in the shared backgrounds, language, and values that race and ethnicity proxy. We suggest that these shared connections are likely to be even more salient for clients and bureaucrats who share not just the same ethnicity but the same country of origin, and we look for evidence of representation based on country of origin in the context of public schools. Leveraging administrative and survey data from Miami-Dade County Public Schools, the fourth-largest school district in the United States, we employ regression models with school-by-year fixed effects to test for differences in test scores for students taught by a teacher with the same country of origin relative to similar students taught by other-origin teachers in the same school in the same year. We find that immigrant students with origin-matched teachers score modestly higher than their non-matched peers in both math and reading. These increases are most apparent among low-income students and those who are English learners. Patterns vary by immigrant students’ origin country.","PeriodicalId":48366,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2022-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49423786","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}
Aasa Karimo, Paul M. Wagner, A. Delicado, James Goodman, A. Gronow, M. Lahsen, Tze-luen Lin, V. Schneider, Keiichi Satoh, L. Schmidt, Sun-Jin Yun, Tuomas Ylä‐Anttila
Collaboration between public administration organizations and various stakeholders is often prescribed as a potential solution to the current complex problems of governance, such as climate change. According to the Advocacy Coalition Framework, shared beliefs are one of the most important drivers of collaboration. However, studies investigating the role of beliefs in collaboration show mixed results. Some argue that similarity of general normative and empirical policy beliefs elicits collaboration, while others focus on beliefs concerning policy instruments. Proposing a new divisive beliefs hypothesis, we suggest that agreeing on those beliefs over which there is substantial disagreement in the policy subsystem is what matters for collaboration. Testing our hypotheses using policy network analysis and data on climate policy subsystems in eleven countries (Australia, Brazil, the Czech Republic, Germany, Finland, Ireland, Japan, Korea, Portugal, Sweden, and Taiwan), we find belief similarity to be a stronger predictor of collaboration when the focus is divisive beliefs rather than normative and empirical policy beliefs or beliefs concerning policy instruments. This knowledge can be useful for managing collaborative governance networks because it helps to identify potential competing coalitions and to broker compromises between them.
{"title":"Shared positions on divisive beliefs explain interorganizational collaboration: Evidence from climate change policy subsystems in eleven countries","authors":"Aasa Karimo, Paul M. Wagner, A. Delicado, James Goodman, A. Gronow, M. Lahsen, Tze-luen Lin, V. Schneider, Keiichi Satoh, L. Schmidt, Sun-Jin Yun, Tuomas Ylä‐Anttila","doi":"10.1093/jopart/muac031","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muac031","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Collaboration between public administration organizations and various stakeholders is often prescribed as a potential solution to the current complex problems of governance, such as climate change. According to the Advocacy Coalition Framework, shared beliefs are one of the most important drivers of collaboration. However, studies investigating the role of beliefs in collaboration show mixed results. Some argue that similarity of general normative and empirical policy beliefs elicits collaboration, while others focus on beliefs concerning policy instruments. Proposing a new divisive beliefs hypothesis, we suggest that agreeing on those beliefs over which there is substantial disagreement in the policy subsystem is what matters for collaboration. Testing our hypotheses using policy network analysis and data on climate policy subsystems in eleven countries (Australia, Brazil, the Czech Republic, Germany, Finland, Ireland, Japan, Korea, Portugal, Sweden, and Taiwan), we find belief similarity to be a stronger predictor of collaboration when the focus is divisive beliefs rather than normative and empirical policy beliefs or beliefs concerning policy instruments. This knowledge can be useful for managing collaborative governance networks because it helps to identify potential competing coalitions and to broker compromises between them.","PeriodicalId":48366,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2022-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47453001","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}
Innovation in public services is propelled by collaborations between public actors, private actors and service users. A substantial literature has centered on the benefits of user involvement in public services, but how user involvement can stimulate collaborative innovation is still largely unknown. This article develops and tests a theoretical framework based on the combined effect of 1) the empowerment of users, 2) specialized knowledge of the users, and 3) the absence of hindering rules and procedures. Data from 19 public-private eHealth collaborations in five European countries, collected through 132 interviews and 124 surveys, are analyzed through fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA), and the results indicate that innovation in these partnerships is influenced by the combined effect of these conditions, but that this combined effect is also contingent on the roles the users adopt in the innovation process.
{"title":"User involvement as a catalyst for collaborative public service innovation","authors":"Chesney Callens","doi":"10.1093/jopart/muac030","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muac030","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Innovation in public services is propelled by collaborations between public actors, private actors and service users. A substantial literature has centered on the benefits of user involvement in public services, but how user involvement can stimulate collaborative innovation is still largely unknown. This article develops and tests a theoretical framework based on the combined effect of 1) the empowerment of users, 2) specialized knowledge of the users, and 3) the absence of hindering rules and procedures. Data from 19 public-private eHealth collaborations in five European countries, collected through 132 interviews and 124 surveys, are analyzed through fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA), and the results indicate that innovation in these partnerships is influenced by the combined effect of these conditions, but that this combined effect is also contingent on the roles the users adopt in the innovation process.","PeriodicalId":48366,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2022-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41704142","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 combination of the high workload associated with keeping top executive branch positions filled and political dysfunction has led to longer and more frequent periods of vacancies in the U.S. executive branch. While scholars commonly claim that such vacancies are harmful for performance, this claim has been difficult to evaluate because of theoretical disagreement, conceptual confusion, and measurement challenges. In this paper we evaluate the relationship between vacancies and performance, describing primary mechanisms by which vacancies (as opposed to turnover) influence performance. We conduct a cross-sectional study using new data on appointee vacancies during the Trump Administration and original performance data from a 2020 survey of federal executives. The Survey on the Future of Government Service includes questions designed to measure comparative self-reported agency performance and questions targeting the mechanisms hypothesized to link vacancies and performance. The paper includes efforts to define and validate the measure of performance, assess the directionality of the relationship between vacancies and performance, control for potential confounders that may explain both vacancies and performance, and evaluate the mechanisms by which vacancies negatively affect performance. The results from OLS models suggest that persistent vacancies are correlated with lower performance. In particular, agencies with persistent vacancies (e.g., 3-4 years) have performance ratings of about one standard deviation lower than those agencies with consistent confirmed leadership. The most likely mechanisms leading to these results are the effect of vacancies on leader time horizons, agency morale, and investment by key stakeholders. We conclude with implications for appointment politics and administrative politicization
{"title":"Do Vacancies Hurt Federal Agency Performance?","authors":"C. Piper, D. Lewis","doi":"10.1093/jopart/muac029","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muac029","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 The combination of the high workload associated with keeping top executive branch positions filled and political dysfunction has led to longer and more frequent periods of vacancies in the U.S. executive branch. While scholars commonly claim that such vacancies are harmful for performance, this claim has been difficult to evaluate because of theoretical disagreement, conceptual confusion, and measurement challenges. In this paper we evaluate the relationship between vacancies and performance, describing primary mechanisms by which vacancies (as opposed to turnover) influence performance. We conduct a cross-sectional study using new data on appointee vacancies during the Trump Administration and original performance data from a 2020 survey of federal executives. The Survey on the Future of Government Service includes questions designed to measure comparative self-reported agency performance and questions targeting the mechanisms hypothesized to link vacancies and performance. The paper includes efforts to define and validate the measure of performance, assess the directionality of the relationship between vacancies and performance, control for potential confounders that may explain both vacancies and performance, and evaluate the mechanisms by which vacancies negatively affect performance. The results from OLS models suggest that persistent vacancies are correlated with lower performance. In particular, agencies with persistent vacancies (e.g., 3-4 years) have performance ratings of about one standard deviation lower than those agencies with consistent confirmed leadership. The most likely mechanisms leading to these results are the effect of vacancies on leader time horizons, agency morale, and investment by key stakeholders. We conclude with implications for appointment politics and administrative politicization","PeriodicalId":48366,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2022-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46207598","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：