{"title":"巴西社会保障中管理人员和官僚的共同职业逻辑:一项街道层面的混合方法研究","authors":"Luiz Henrique Alonso de Andrade, Elias Pekkola","doi":"10.1108/ijpsm-08-2023-0240","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Purpose</h3>\n<p>This research addresses the professional logics of street-level managers (SLMs) and bureaucrats (SLBs) working in the Brazilian National Social Security Agency (INSS) through their perceptions of distributive justice and discretion. Since SLMs have the authority to influence SLBs' actions, we investigate whether these two groups hold similar viewpoints.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\n<p>We integrate the administrative data and survey responses (<em>n</em> = 678) with earlier thematic content analysis (<em>n</em> = 350) in three stages: mean-testing, regression analyses and complementary qualitative analysis, integrated through a mixed-methods matrix.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Findings</h3>\n<p>Whilst no significant differences emerge in distributive justice ideas between groups, SLMs demand wider benefit-granting discretion, praising professionalism whilst adopting managerial posture and jargon.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Research limitations/implications</h3>\n<p>The study adds to the theoretical discussions concerning SLM’s influence on SLB’s decision-making, suggesting that other factors outweigh it. The finding concerning the managers’ demand for wider discretion asks for further in-depth approaches.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Practical implications</h3>\n<p>Findings supply valuable insights for policymakers and managers steering administrative reforms, by questioning whether some roles SLMs play are limited to symbolic levels. Further, SLBs’ heterogenous formations might be more relevant to policy divergence than managerial influence and perhaps an underutilised source of innovation.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\n<p>By approaching street-level management professional logics within a Global South welfare state through a mixed-methods approach, this study offers a holistic understanding of complex dynamics, providing novel insights for public sector management.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->","PeriodicalId":47437,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Public Sector Management","volume":"100 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Shared professional logics amongst managers and bureaucrats in Brazilian social security: a street-level mixed-methods study\",\"authors\":\"Luiz Henrique Alonso de Andrade, Elias Pekkola\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/ijpsm-08-2023-0240\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<h3>Purpose</h3>\\n<p>This research addresses the professional logics of street-level managers (SLMs) and bureaucrats (SLBs) working in the Brazilian National Social Security Agency (INSS) through their perceptions of distributive justice and discretion. Since SLMs have the authority to influence SLBs' actions, we investigate whether these two groups hold similar viewpoints.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\\n<p>We integrate the administrative data and survey responses (<em>n</em> = 678) with earlier thematic content analysis (<em>n</em> = 350) in three stages: mean-testing, regression analyses and complementary qualitative analysis, integrated through a mixed-methods matrix.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Findings</h3>\\n<p>Whilst no significant differences emerge in distributive justice ideas between groups, SLMs demand wider benefit-granting discretion, praising professionalism whilst adopting managerial posture and jargon.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Research limitations/implications</h3>\\n<p>The study adds to the theoretical discussions concerning SLM’s influence on SLB’s decision-making, suggesting that other factors outweigh it. The finding concerning the managers’ demand for wider discretion asks for further in-depth approaches.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Practical implications</h3>\\n<p>Findings supply valuable insights for policymakers and managers steering administrative reforms, by questioning whether some roles SLMs play are limited to symbolic levels. Further, SLBs’ heterogenous formations might be more relevant to policy divergence than managerial influence and perhaps an underutilised source of innovation.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\\n<p>By approaching street-level management professional logics within a Global South welfare state through a mixed-methods approach, this study offers a holistic understanding of complex dynamics, providing novel insights for public sector management.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\",\"PeriodicalId\":47437,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Public Sector Management\",\"volume\":\"100 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Public Sector Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/ijpsm-08-2023-0240\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Public Sector Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/ijpsm-08-2023-0240","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
Shared professional logics amongst managers and bureaucrats in Brazilian social security: a street-level mixed-methods study
Purpose
This research addresses the professional logics of street-level managers (SLMs) and bureaucrats (SLBs) working in the Brazilian National Social Security Agency (INSS) through their perceptions of distributive justice and discretion. Since SLMs have the authority to influence SLBs' actions, we investigate whether these two groups hold similar viewpoints.
Design/methodology/approach
We integrate the administrative data and survey responses (n = 678) with earlier thematic content analysis (n = 350) in three stages: mean-testing, regression analyses and complementary qualitative analysis, integrated through a mixed-methods matrix.
Findings
Whilst no significant differences emerge in distributive justice ideas between groups, SLMs demand wider benefit-granting discretion, praising professionalism whilst adopting managerial posture and jargon.
Research limitations/implications
The study adds to the theoretical discussions concerning SLM’s influence on SLB’s decision-making, suggesting that other factors outweigh it. The finding concerning the managers’ demand for wider discretion asks for further in-depth approaches.
Practical implications
Findings supply valuable insights for policymakers and managers steering administrative reforms, by questioning whether some roles SLMs play are limited to symbolic levels. Further, SLBs’ heterogenous formations might be more relevant to policy divergence than managerial influence and perhaps an underutilised source of innovation.
Originality/value
By approaching street-level management professional logics within a Global South welfare state through a mixed-methods approach, this study offers a holistic understanding of complex dynamics, providing novel insights for public sector management.
期刊介绍:
The International Journal of Public Sector Management (IJPSM) publishes academic articles on the management, governance, and reform of public sector organizations around the world, aiming to provide an accessible and valuable resource for academics and public managers alike. IJPSM covers the full range of public management research including studies of organizations, public finances, performance management, Human Resources Management, strategy, leadership, accountability, integrity, collaboration, e-government, procurement, and more. IJPSM encourages scholars to publish their empirical research and is particularly interested in comparative findings. IJPSM is open to articles using a variety of research methods and theoretical approaches.