AbstractDespite its grounding in prestigious theories of behavioral science, the findings of both academic and applied behavioral public administration (BPA) have tended to present a rather mixed picture of often contradictory results that appear highly context dependent. And more developed theory and better methods may not do much to remedy the situation. Rather, we should perhaps begin to view BPA through the lens of Charles Lindblom's notion of a science of muddling through. That is, BPA should perhaps be seen not so much as a theory-driven attempt to uncover universal regularities of human thought and behavior, but rather as a method of incremental, limited adjustments—tested by successive randomized controlled trials (RCTs)—that form part of an evolutionary process of trial-and-error aimed at solving applied problems in localized settings. Implications for academic and applied BPA are discussed.
AbstractRepresentative bureaucracy has been investigated empirically and debated normatively, but there exists little evidence about how the general public views representative bureaucracy—especially the legitimacy of active representation. Using a survey experiment, this article explores people's fairness judgments of active representation in two important social and policy contexts: education and gender, and policing and race. Results from an online sample of U.S. adults show that, in the case of education, a female teacher helping a female student was judged to be unfair, with the negative effect mainly coming from the male respondents in the study. In the case of policing, a white officer acting favorably toward a white citizen was judged to be unfair, with the negative effect driven largely by black and Hispanic respondents in the study. Implications for representative bureaucracy theory and research, as well as policy and practice, are discussed.
The 'end of history illusion' refers to the tendency of people to underestimate change in their future values and preferences. Could this cognitive bias apply to the work motivations of those in public service? To examine this question, a sample of public service professionals was asked about their current work motivations and then randomized to be 'reporters', who recalled their work motivations 10 years ago, and 'predictors', who forecast their work motivations 10 years from now. Predictors expected much less change in their work motivations over time than reporters actually experienced. Specifically, predictors underestimated the importance of helping others and of working independently, and they overestimated the importance of income. Thus, public service professionals, who are often assumed to have unique prosocial motivations, seem to be subject to an 'end of history illusion' when making decisions about what job characteristics will matter to them over the course of their careers.
Government job satisfaction has been shown to reflect individual, job and organizational characteristics, but important national crises or events that dramatically alter the image of public service in society and the meaning of work in the public sector may also play a role. The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, are an important example, yet it is not known how the attacks and their aftermath may have influenced the everyday job satisfaction of government workers in the United States. Using a difference-in-difference regression strategy and data from the General Social Survey, this study compares change in job satisfaction of government workers to that of private sector workers before and after the attacks. The findings indicate that 9-11 may have boosted government job satisfaction 5 to 10 percentage points, representing 1 to 2 million additional satisfied government workers in the United States. Thus important national crises may causally influence government job satisfaction in nontrivial ways.
Résumé Les enquêtes auprès des citoyens présentent de nombreux avantages afin d'effectuer des mesures comparatives de l'efficacité, notamment entre des villes, des régions ou des pays, qui emploient souvent des indicateurs et des systèmes de présentation de l'information relativement différents. La validité, et donc la signification, de ces évaluations subjectives de l'efficacité de l'État suscitent bon nombre de débats et un scepticisme certain. Une récente étude sur la propreté des rues à New York faisait toutefois apparaître une forte corrélation entre les perceptions des citoyens et les évaluations objectives effectuées par des observateurs qualifiés. Dans la présente étude, nous nous servons des données et de l'approche analytique utilisées dans cette enquête sur New York pour vérifier la validité des perceptions des citoyens à l'égard d'un autre service de base municipal, à savoir l'état du revêtement des routes, par comparaison à une mesure élaborée et objective du lissé des routes effectuée par le Fund for the City of New York. Contrairement aux observations de l'enquête sur la propreté des rues, nous n'avons constaté, dans la présente étude, aucune corrélation ou presque entre les mesures objective et subjective du lissé des routes. Ces résultats indiquent que la validité des enquêtes auprès des citoyens est, dans une large mesure, déterminée par le service ou la situation mesurés. Des recherches empiriques complémentaires s'imposent sur les aspects du travail de l'État que les citoyens peuvent ou non juger. Résumé à l'intention des praticiens Les praticiens font souvent appel aux enquêtes auprès des citoyens pour mesurer la qualité des services, mais rien ne leur garantit que les résultats de ces enquêtes contiennent des informations fiables sur l'efficacité réelle de l'État. Les citoyens perçoivent-ils le travail de l'État tel qu'il est réellement ? Ou le voient-ils de façon essentiellement subjective ? De façon intéressante, c'est parfois un peu des deux. Notre article se base sur une étude qui révèle que les citoyens de New York sont assez doués pour évaluer la propreté des rues de la ville. Dans cette nouvelle étude, nous avons utilisé les mêmes données et la même méthode que celles utilisées dans cette étude et avons constaté que les citoyens sont nettement moins bons lorsqu'il s'agit d'évaluer le lissé des revêtements routiers. Nous donnons quelques indications sur les types de services que les citoyens sont le plus à même d'évaluer et sur la façon d'interpréter les différentes évaluations de la qualité du service illustrées dans les enquêtes auprès des citoyens.
Citizen surveys have many advantages for comparative performance measurement, particularly across cities, regions or countries that often employ quite different performance indicators and reporting systems. But much debate and skepticism exists about the validity and therefore meaning of subjective ratings of government performance. A recent study of street cleanliness in New York, however, found that citizen perceptions do strongly correlate with objective ratings by trained observers. The present study uses the same New York survey data and analytical approach to test the validity of citizen perceptions of another basic city service, the condition of road surfaces, in comparison to a sophisticated, objective measure of road smoothness conducted by the Fund for the City of New York. In contrast to the street cleanliness findings, the present study finds almost no correlation at all between objective and subjective measures of road smoothness. These results suggest that the validity of citizen surveys depends a great deal on the service or condition being measured. More empirical research on the specific aspects of government performance that citizens can, or cannot, judge well is needed. Points for practitioners Practitioners often rely on citizen surveys to measure service quality, but they remain uncertain if survey results tell them much about actual government performance. Do citizens perceive government performance as it really is? Or do they view it through a largely subjective lens? Interestingly, it may be a bit of both. This article builds on a prior study that showed how citizens of New York can be quite good judges of the cleanliness of city streets. But using the same data and method, this new study finds that citizens do a decidedly worse job at judging the smoothness of road surfaces. Some guidance is offered about which kinds of services citizens can judge best and how to interpret various service quality ratings captured in a citizen survey.
