Building Bridges or Burning Them? The President, the Appointees, and the Bureaucracy

Ingraham, Patricia W.

doi:10.2307/976068

Cited by 51 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…There are few studies on characteristics of ministers and ministerial leadership (Chabal, 2003) but relatively more on senior executive positions (Aberbach & Rockman, 1997;Barker & Wilson, 1997;Golden, 1992;Ingraham, 1987; Ingraham, Thompson, & Eisenberg, 1995).…”

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 98%

Dual Faces of Ministerial Leadership in South Korea: Does Political Responsiveness or Administrative Responsibility Enhance Perceived Ministerial Performance?

Lee

Moon²,

Hahm

2010

Administration & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study is designed to examine dual faces of ministerial leadership that functions in the gray area of politics and administration when a minister performs his or her role as a political appointee and as a department head. The dual faces of ministerial leadership require somehow both political responsiveness and administrative responsibility for effective ministerial performance. Using the perceptual data of middle-and high-ranked South Korean government officials collected from the 2002 and 2007 Korean Minister Surveys, this study attempts to understand the relationship between types of ministerial leadership and performance in agenda setting, policy implementation, and internal management. The results of this study show that president-centered ministerial leadership (political responsiveness) is positively associated with agenda-setting performance and policy implementation performance whereas department-centered leadership

show abstract

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 98%

Dual Faces of Ministerial Leadership in South Korea: Does Political Responsiveness or Administrative Responsibility Enhance Perceived Ministerial Performance?

Lee

Moon²,

Hahm

2010

Administration & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Fifth, CSRA neither fully insulated SES and high-level management from illegitimate political pressures (Shafritz et al 2005) nor achieved many of its pay-for-performance goals (Daley 1995). In fact, instead of enhancing control of the bureaucracy, the CSRA reforms are more likely to reduce the quality of public management (Ingraham 1987). Finally, modern civil service has made it increasingly difficult to punish poor performers and recruit, hire, and reward talented workers (Osborne and Gaebler 1993;Walters 2002) and has not effectively thwarted the politicization of the bureaucracy as elected officials continue to micromanage administration and use political tactics to pressure bureaucrats (Newland 1995).…”

Section: Mary K Feeney and Gordon Kingsleymentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Increasing reliance on partisan political appointees instead of bipartisan professional experts weakens the executive and other elected leaders (Newland 1987). Appointees tend to have little prior experience, bypass career managers, and serve for short periods, which reduces learning and consistency in management-level positions (Ingraham 1987). Reshaping modern civil service provisions can increase bureaucratic efficiency, enabling public managers and political leaders to hire, fire, and shift the direction of public policies, while still providing employees with a shield against the grosser forms of political influence.…”

Section: Mary K Feeney and Gordon Kingsleymentioning

confidence: 97%

“…The CSRA also instituted a merit system for employees at general schedule pay grades 13-15 and the Senior Executive Service (SES), a group of elite senior-level managers. The SES was intended to enable high-ranking civil servants to move between agencies and departments and provide them with greater influence on staffing patterns, incentives, and productivity (Ingraham 1995).…”

Section: Mary K Feeney and Gordon Kingsleymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Rebirth of Patronage: Have We Come Full Circle?

Feeney¹,

Kingsley

2008

Public Integrity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Current trends in the U.S. political system threaten an increase in patronage and a return to the political problems of the 1800s. Modern-day patronage is strongly related to two popular efforts to reform government: the rollback of the civil service system and the privatization of government services. These reforms, aimed at reducing the negative outcomes of bureaucracy, have had the unfortunate outcome of eliminating policies designed to protect civil servants from patronage politics and thus of ultimately reducing democratic accountability. Whether the main cause is forgetfulness about the past or simply the application of misguided principles, the dismantling of the civil service and increasing reliance on private contractors can endanger public values and the ability to engage in a thoughtful debate about public values. Professionalism in government-including civil service, open competition for jobs and contracts, and merit systems-remains the most effective and just means for combating patronage and identifying talented, dedicated public servants and contractors. For many Americans "patronage" is an outdated term that conjures up images of Andrew Jackson, Tammany Hall, and machine politics. The nineteenth-century version of patronage, when an elected official appointed friends and supporters to desirable government posts, was often referred to as the spoils system, a term derived from the idea that to the victor (and the victor's friends) belong the spoils of political success. Back then, obtaining and retaining a post in the public sector required loyalty to a powerful executive or a political party. Loyalty was demonstrated by making financial contributions to the party, campaigning for its candidates, or bringing in votes. This behavior may seem all too familiar, but today patronage is often disguised with a more benign term, "partisanship," or sometimes, from a negative perspective, "cronyism."Although patronage has lost some of its luster, the spoils system is alive and well in the United States today. In fact, it may be growing more prevalent as civil service protections are withdrawn and the use of outsourcing spreads. Modern-day examples of patronage range from Mayor Richard M. Daley in Chicago, accused

show abstract

“…See Note 28 below. 26 Of course, careerists rarely view all appointees as being skilled or as having appropriate qualifications for their jobs (e.g., Cohen 1998;Ingraham 1987;Pfiffner 1996; National Commission on the Public Service 1989; Stehr 1997). 27 For example, Miller once addressed FTC careerists wearing a devil costume As he described his agenda, arguing that he was not Satan.…”

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does Where You Stand Depend on Where You Sit? Careerists' Attitudes toward Political Appointees under Reagan

Hult¹,

Maranto²

2010

ARP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With the noted exception of George H.W. Bush, Republican presidents since Dwight Eisenhower have pursued administrative presidency strategies, which include political appointments to subcabinet positions. Less clear is whether and how appointments strategies affect the reactions of careerists to political appointees. Here, we turn for insight to data collected from senior careerists during the administration of Ronald Reagan, which emphasized such strategies. The findings indicate that careerists’ ideology influenced their views of the political appointees for whom they worked, particularly in regulatory agencies. Agency affiliation also was important, though not always as anticipated.

show abstract

Building Bridges or Burning Them? The President, the Appointees, and the Bureaucracy

Cited by 51 publications

References 4 publications

Dual Faces of Ministerial Leadership in South Korea: Does Political Responsiveness or Administrative Responsibility Enhance Perceived Ministerial Performance?

Dual Faces of Ministerial Leadership in South Korea: Does Political Responsiveness or Administrative Responsibility Enhance Perceived Ministerial Performance?

The Rebirth of Patronage: Have We Come Full Circle?

Does Where You Stand Depend on Where You Sit? Careerists' Attitudes toward Political Appointees under Reagan

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About