Suchergebnisse

In recent years, public management research has made great strides in explaining the drivers of employee turnover in the public sector, with key findings related to the role of employee loyalty, organizational satisfaction, person-organization fit, and compensation. This article contributes to this growing body of literature by assessing the influence of a previously untested driver of employee turnover at the state level of government: public—private wage equity. Contrary to conventional wisdom, results suggest that public—private wage equity does not significantly influence voluntary separation rates, whereas state government unionization and the average age of state government employees are found to be indirectly related to voluntary separation. Results also point to the potential implications of ethnicity, gender, and public service motivation in state government employee turnover and provide key insights for those seeking to further understand the impact of reduced expenditures on public sector wages and shifting age distributions in public sector employment.

George W. Bush assumed the presidency with the ill-fated political aim of creating a permanent electoral alignment favoring Reagan Republicanism in America by pursuing a "big government conservatism", agenda with human resource management (HRM) strategies lying at its heart. In the process of setting the other HRM-focused contributions to this symposium in broader context, the authors define the logic of big government conservativism as a strategy for electoral realignment, discuss the place of HRM as a tactical means for advancing that agenda, and place Bush's efforts in "political time." In offering an integrative framework for assessing the critical role of the White House, the executive office of the president, and political appointees in redefining the career civil service as a key component of Bush's big conservatism agenda, we portray Bush's failed efforts at constructing a permanent Republican political majority as encountering similar dynamics and meeting a similar fate as other "orthodox innovators" in presidential history. At the same time, his place in political time was not destiny, because he achieved a mixed record of strategic, political, and tactical competence while operating within the constraints of his political time.