Suchergebnisse

Public administration research has produced a large literature on the determinants, consequences, and complexities of goal clarity and ambiguity. This article contributes to this line of work by examining how perceived goal ambiguity and goal multiplicity condition the effect of top administrators' management on performance. In the context of U.S. nursing homes, we find that the positive effect of management on service quality tends to decrease when administrators report facing high levels of goal ambiguity and pursue numerous priorities that they consider important. This study improves our understanding of the complex mechanisms through which managerial strategies influence organizational outcomes.

AbstractIncreased reliance on automated systems in government raises important questions about the impact of these systems on program participation. We look at the relationship between an automated application process and program participation through a representation lens. From a representative bureaucracy perspective, we examine whether gender representation increases participation intentions compared with interacting with an automated system. We also consider a political dimension of representation, investigating whether interacting with an automated system increases participation intentions among those whose policy preferences do not align with program goals. While we do not see differences based on gender representation in our survey experiment, we do find evidence that an automated system leads to greater willingness to participate among those whose policy preferences do not align with the program. These results provide insight into when automated systems may influence participation, suggesting a potential positive role among those who are not politically favorable toward a program.

AbstractPublic views of government are linked to trust, coproduction, regulatory compliance, and political participation. This study focuses on factors shaping public attitudes toward government programs by exploring whether direct participation in governance matters for how the public evaluates the performance of government programs. With an experiment involving governmentally funded food assistance, we randomize the presence of public participation, service providers' sector, and third‐party performance ratings and explore their influence on respondents' assessments of the program. We find that respondents have more confidence in the efficiency, equity, and other aspects of performance when ordinary people play a role in designing and implementing the program. We observe no sector bias among respondents. Individual assessments depend on objective performance information from a credible source. These findings have critical implications for the value people place on engagement in governance and point to the role of publicly available data in shaping public views of government.

AbstractReporting government performance to the public is key tool in improving accountability. Some evidence, however, has shown that individuals' anti‐public sector biases may distort performance information about public organizations. Using an experimental vignette on U.S. nursing homes, this study fills four gaps in the literature: (1) the need to include nonprofit organizations rather than just public and for‐profit, (2) consideration of the credibility of the source of performance information, (3) the use of simple commonly used performance metrics, and (4) the willingness to use services as a performance dimension. We find the public has a general but modest anti‐for‐profit sector bias in nursing home care with nonprofits perceived the most positively. Sector biases generally disappear when clear performance data are presented. The credibility of the source matters, and respondents' willingness to use organizational services is more sensitive to both sector bias and performance ratings than are performance measures.Practitioner Points

In the field of long‐term care, individuals have no anti‐public sector bias, and they have more favorable views of nonprofit organizations than for‐profit organizations.
Perceived sector bias disappears when simple and unambiguous performance information is introduced.
The source of performance information matters: individuals perceive the information from government and nonprofit sources as more credible than that from for‐profit sources.
A high degree of credibility amplifies the effect of performance information in shaping individuals' evaluations of public services.

Bureaucratic reforms worldwide seek to improve the quality of governance. In this article, we argue that the major governance failures are political, not bureaucratic, and the first step to better governance is to recognize the underlying political causes. Using illustrations from throughout the world, we contend that political institutions fail to provide clear policy goals, rarely allocate adequate resources to deal with the scope of the problems, and do not allow the bureaucracy sufficient autonomy in implementation. Rational bureaucratic responses to these problems, in turn, create additional governance problems that could have been avoided if political institutions perform their primary functions.