Suchergebnisse

Traditionally, studies couched within the theory of representative bureaucracy have focused on examining outcomes for social minorities within a specific set of administrative practices or public policies. The concept of administrative discretion typically lies at the core of these studies, as public servants do indeed need to enjoy a certain level of administrative discretion in order to incorporate the values of a given group into their everyday decision-making. Yet, while the centrality of administrative discretion is seldom, if ever, questioned and it is most often implicitly assumed, its actual effects are rarely explicitly explored. This study, constructed on the theoretical insights drawn from representative bureaucracy and role theories, examines the relationship between administrative discretion and the assumption of roles by public servants, in particular, the representation role of steward of public interest. The empirical results confirm that administrative discretion has a significant impact on the types of roles assumed by public administrators.

There is a growing recognition among scholars that those engaged in qualitative research often face a number of serious methodological and personal challenges. Rather surprisingly, these difficulties receive relatively limited attention within the academic literature. Given the rising role of qualitative methodologies within social science research, the benefits of and the need for honest and practical discussions regarding what researchers should expect when entering fieldwork become increasingly obvious. This article draws on my fieldwork experiences of studying public corruption in the Republic of Moldova, a former Soviet state. I provide reflections on the methodological, practical, and personal challenges of conducting qualitative research on a sensitive issue within a social setting that is not structurally inclined to support projects of such nature. The discussion is primarily focused on the research difficulties that are bound to arise with any attempt to confirm previously suggested propositions within the post-Soviet social matrices. This article and the suggestions made here fall in line with a number of other recent works which have been motivated by the call to share insights and guidance about the challenges, "tricks of the trade," and dangers of fieldwork in remarkable settings.

There are few who would question that within their everyday discretionary choices and decision making, public servants can develop into consequential and dynamic actors in the policy process. Participation in policy formulation is a particularly meaningful stage within which administrators can make a noticeable impact in shaping public policy. Whether they do so or not often comes down to an individual choice. Yet, while there is a great deal of anecdotal evidence regarding public servants' involvement in policy formulation, there is relatively less empirical research in the area. In particular, there is little known about the conditions under which some public administrators are more likely than others to seek to become involved in policy formulation. This study explores the effects that stakeholders' expectations, self-expectations, administrative discretion, and tenure have on administrators' predispositions to seek opportunities to participate in the formulation of public policy issues they find important.

Although routinely criticized for its many flaws, bureaucracy, as a form of organizing, remains perceived as being more efficient than any other currently known forms of administration. In fact, efficiency is often considered as the primary purpose of bureaucratic organization. This article examines the current administrative telos of American bureaucracies. It makes the twofold argument that bureaucracy's dominant purpose, as a form of organizing, changes with time, and given the contingency of the political and historical developments of the past four decades, administrative efficiency can no longer be freely associated with bureaucratic constructs. It is hypothesized that instilling stability, by shielding public servants and their decision-making from environmental volatility and stakeholders' challenges, much of which are political in character, has become the current dominant telos of American bureaucracies.

Scholars have suggested that the delineation of a field's "big" questions is critical for its cohesive and practical intellectual growth. Instilling a habitual practice of focusing inquiries on fundamental questions is particularly warranted for fledgling areas of research. Currently, while there is already a rich body of literature that addresses administrative, computer, information, and cyber ethics, only a limited number of writings discuss ethical problems specifically within the e-government context. It can be argued that the e-government condition introduces a distinctive type of ethical problems; questions regarding which have yet to be properly framed. This article suggests five critical questions of e-government ethics at the organizational level that justify notable academic attention.