Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T00:37:31.005Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Organizational Involvement and Representative Bureaucracy: Can We Have It Both Ways?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

Barbara S. Romzek  and
J. Stephen Hendricks
Barbara S. Romzek
Affiliation:
University of Kansas
J. Stephen Hendricks
Affiliation:
University of Texas at Austin
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article addresses an important issue of democratic theory and administration: the potential conflict between bureaucrats' allegiance to their agencies and to specific publics' interests. Representative bureaucracy, which emphasizes substantive interest representation in the administrative arena, embodies this potential for conflict. Empirical survey results which probe integration of substantive representation and employee allegiance among federal employees in four major agencies are presented. Evidence documents a different level of organizational involvement in an agency with a substantive representation mandate compared to employee involvement in agencies without a mandate for representation. While the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights' mandate affords considerable potential for integrating substantive representation and employee allegiance, its employees do not rank highly in organizational involvement. Even more surprising, CCR minority employees are lowest in involvement. These findings imply an important hypothesis: effectiveness in achieving an agency mandate is crucial to successful integration of organizational involvement and substantive representation.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 76 , Issue 1 , March 1982 , pp. 75 - 82
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1982

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Angle, H., and Perry, J. (1981). “An Empirical Assessment of Organizational Commitment and Organizational Effectiveness.” Administrative Science Quarterly 26: 1–14.10.2307/2392596CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biddle, B. (1979). Role Theory: Expectations, Identities, and Behaviors. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Buchanan, B. (1974). “Building Organizational Commitment: The Socialization of Managers in Work Organizations.” Administrative Science Quarterly 19: 533–46.Google Scholar
Dahl, R. (1961). Who Governs? New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Edelman, M. (1964). Symbolic Uses of Politics. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Etzioni, A. (1975). A Comparative Analysis of Complete Organizations. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Hall, D. T., Schneider, B., and Nygren, H. T. (1970). “Personal Factors in Organizational Identification.” Administrative Science Quarterly 15: 176–90.10.2307/2391488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hrebiniak, L. G., and Alutto, J. A. (1972). “Personal and Role-Related Factors in the Development of Organizational Commitment.” Administrative Science Quarterly 17: 555–73.10.2307/2393833CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaufman, H. (1960). The Forest Ranger. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Kelman, H. (1958). “Compliance, Identification, and Internalization: Three Processes of Attitude Change.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 2: 51–60.10.1177/002200275800200106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kingsley, J. D. (1944). Representative Bureaucracy. Yellow Springs, Ohio: Antioch Press.Google Scholar
Kranz, H. (1976). The Participatory Bureaucracy. Lexington, Mass.: D.C. Heath.Google Scholar
Larson, A. (1973). “Representative Bureaucracy and Administrative Responsibility: A Reassessment.” Midwest Review of Public Administration 7: 79–90.Google Scholar
Lodahl, T., and Kejner, M. (1965). “The Definition and Measurement of Job Involvement.” Journal of Applied Psychology 49: 24–33.10.1037/h0021692CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Maslow, A. (1954). Motivation and Personality. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
McGuire, W. (1968). “The Nature of Attitudes and Attitude Change.” in Lindzey, G. and Aronzon, E. (eds.), The Handbook of Social Psychology, vol. 3. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Meier, K. J. (1975). “Representative Bureaucracy: An Empirical Analysis.” American Political Science Review 69: 526–42.10.2307/1959084CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meier, K. J., and Nigro, L. (1976). “Representative Bureaucracy and Policy Preferences: A Study in Attitudes of Federal Executives.” Public Administration Review 36: 458–69.10.2307/974854CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, W. (1968). “Social Structure and Behavior.” In Lindzey, G. and Aronson, E. (eds.), The Handbook of Social Psychology, vol. 4. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Mosher, F. (1968). Democracy and the Public Service. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pasmore, W. (1979). “Turning People on to Work.” In Kolb, D., Rubin, I., and McIntyre, J. (eds.), Organizational Psychology. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Peterson, P. E. (1970). “Forms of Representation: Participation of the Poor in the Community Action Program.” American Political Science Review 64: 491–507.10.2307/1953845CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Porter, L. W., Steers, R. M., Mowday, R. T., and Boulian, P. V. (1974). “Organizational Commitment, Job Satisfaction, and Turnover among Psychiatric Technicians.” Journal of Applied Psychology 59: 603–09.10.1037/h0037335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rokeach, M. (1972). Beliefs, Attitudes and Values: A Theory of Organization and Chánge. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.Google Scholar
Romzek, B. (1979). “The Multidimensional Bureaucrat: Identities, Loyalties and Conflicts of Professional Level Federal Employees.” Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Government, University of Tayoe of Austin.Google Scholar
Sarbin, T., and Allen, V. (1968). “Role Theory.” In Lindzey, G. and Aronson, E. (eds.), The Handbook of Social Psychology, vol. 1. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Selznick, P. (1949). The TVA and the Grass Roots: A Study in the Sociology of Formal Organizations. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Simon, H. (1976). Administrative Behavior. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Subramaniam, V. (1967). “Representative Bureaucracy: A Reassessment.” American Political Science Review 61: 1010–19.10.2307/1953403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, F. (1976). “Types of Representative Bureaucracy and Their Linkage: The Case of Ethnicity.” In Golembiewski, R., Gibson, F., and Cornog, G. (eds.), Public Administration: Readings in Institutions, Processes, Behavior, Policy. Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
Thompson, J. (1967). Organizations in Action. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Woll, P. (1977). American Bureaucracy. New York: W.W. Norton and Co.Google Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.