既不是灵丹妙药也不是大灰狼——对一线法官管理化态度与应对的系统考察

IF 3.2 3区 管理学 Q1 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION Administration & Society Pub Date : 2023-03-23 DOI:10.1177/00953997231157748
Émilien Colaux, Nathalie Schiffino, Stéphane Moyson
{"title":"既不是灵丹妙药也不是大灰狼——对一线法官管理化态度与应对的系统考察","authors":"Émilien Colaux, Nathalie Schiffino, Stéphane Moyson","doi":"10.1177/00953997231157748","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"How do frontline judges perceive managerial reforms, and how do they cope with them? We relied on concepts from street-level bureaucracy to systematically review the effects of managerial techniques on frontline judges in 35 studies. We find that judges’ attitudes toward managerialization are more heterogeneous than might be anticipated. Beyond facing an increasing caseload, judges are pressed to reduce treatment times and costs as well as to play managerial roles. Judges’ mechanisms to cope with pressures include rationing, prioritizing, and routinizing. While managerialization is a solution to the increasing caseload, it might well affect the quality of justice.","PeriodicalId":47966,"journal":{"name":"Administration & Society","volume":"55 1","pages":"921 - 952"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Neither the Magic Bullet Nor the Big Bad Wolf: A Systematic Review of Frontline Judges’ Attitudes and Coping Regarding Managerialization\",\"authors\":\"Émilien Colaux, Nathalie Schiffino, Stéphane Moyson\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00953997231157748\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"How do frontline judges perceive managerial reforms, and how do they cope with them? We relied on concepts from street-level bureaucracy to systematically review the effects of managerial techniques on frontline judges in 35 studies. We find that judges’ attitudes toward managerialization are more heterogeneous than might be anticipated. Beyond facing an increasing caseload, judges are pressed to reduce treatment times and costs as well as to play managerial roles. Judges’ mechanisms to cope with pressures include rationing, prioritizing, and routinizing. While managerialization is a solution to the increasing caseload, it might well affect the quality of justice.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47966,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Administration & Society\",\"volume\":\"55 1\",\"pages\":\"921 - 952\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Administration & Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00953997231157748\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Administration & Society","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00953997231157748","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

一线法官如何看待管理改革,他们如何应对?我们依靠街头官僚机构的概念,在35项研究中系统地审查了管理技术对一线法官的影响。我们发现,法官对管理化的态度比预期的更具异质性。除了面临越来越多的案件外,法官还面临着减少治疗时间和费用以及发挥管理作用的压力。法官应对压力的机制包括定量配给、优先排序和程序化。虽然管理化是解决不断增加的案件数量的一种方法,但它很可能会影响司法质量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Neither the Magic Bullet Nor the Big Bad Wolf: A Systematic Review of Frontline Judges’ Attitudes and Coping Regarding Managerialization
How do frontline judges perceive managerial reforms, and how do they cope with them? We relied on concepts from street-level bureaucracy to systematically review the effects of managerial techniques on frontline judges in 35 studies. We find that judges’ attitudes toward managerialization are more heterogeneous than might be anticipated. Beyond facing an increasing caseload, judges are pressed to reduce treatment times and costs as well as to play managerial roles. Judges’ mechanisms to cope with pressures include rationing, prioritizing, and routinizing. While managerialization is a solution to the increasing caseload, it might well affect the quality of justice.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Administration & Society
Administration & Society PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION-
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
4.30%
发文量
37
期刊介绍: Administration & Society seeks to further the understanding of public and human service organizations, their administrative processes, and their effect on society. The journal publishes empirically oriented research reports and theoretically specific articles that synthesize or contribute to the advancement of understanding and explanation in these fields. Of particular interest are (1) studies that analyze the effects of the introduction of administrative strategies, programs, change interventions, and training; and (2) studies of intergroup, interorganizational, and organization-environment relationships and policy processes.
期刊最新文献
Community Diversity and Social Media Use in Local Governments Public-Private Partnerships in the Healthcare Sector and Sustainability: Managerial Insights from a Systematic Literature Review CEO Turnover and Openness of Decision-making Processes in the Post-succession Phase: Exploring a Threat-rigidity Perspective The Adequacy of Cost-Benefit Analysis in the Assessment of Public Value: A Case Study From the Transportation Sector New Paths for Public Governance: Literature Review, Content Analysis, and Conceptual Framework Proposal in an Integrative View
×
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