Common Method Bias in Public Management Studies

Jakobsen, Morten; Jensen, Rasmus Lund

doi:10.1080/10967494.2014.997906

Cited by 509 publications

(350 citation statements)

References 55 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

334

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Yet we are especially interested in examining interaction effects, and it has recently been argued that this is a case where common source bias is typically of less concern (Jakobsen & Jensen, 2015). Siemsen, Roth, and Oliveira (2010) have thus shown that when true interaction effects exist, common method variance tends to attenuate these effects.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sector Differences in the Public Service Motivation–Job Satisfaction Relationship: Exploring the Role of Organizational Characteristics

Kjeldsen

Hansen

2016

Review of Public Personnel Administration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public service motivation (PSM) has a documented, positive effect on job satisfactionespecially in the public sector. However, organizational characteristics such as red tape, hierarchical authority, and the absence of organizational goal specificity, which are often more present in public sector organizations, may have negative influences on the PSM-job satisfaction relationship. This study explores the impact of these organizational characteristics on sector differences in the PSM-job satisfaction relationship in a "hard case" setting. Using survey data with low-level, white-collar employees, we confirm a positive PSM-job satisfaction association in the public sector compared with the private sector, where we see a negative association. Furthermore, perceived red tape and the absence of organizational goal specificity have negative influences on job satisfaction; nevertheless, sector differences remain in the PSM-job satisfaction relationship when controlled for these organizational characteristics. This suggests that public/private sector status is more important for the PSM-job satisfaction relationship than other organizational characteristics.[2]

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sector Differences in the Public Service Motivation–Job Satisfaction Relationship: Exploring the Role of Organizational Characteristics

Kjeldsen

Hansen

2016

Review of Public Personnel Administration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…perceived strategic-decision quality), common method bias might be less of a concern (Favero & Bullock, 2014;Meier & O'Toole, 2013). Nevertheless, we tried to minimize issues of common method bias through our survey design and by identifying its impact through a statistical test (Jakobsen & Jensen, 2014). First, our survey design followed recommendations of MacKenzie and Podsakoff (2012) and Podsakoff, MacKenzie, and Podsakoff (2012).…”

Section: Common Methods Biasmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In order to emphasize the importance and accuracy of responses, we explained the central objectives of the survey in the introduction mail and we offered full anonymity. The dependent and independent variables were separated in the survey by placing them on different pages, which creates a time lag between the respondent's answers (Jakobsen & Jensen, 2014;Podsakoff et al, 2012). Second, we identified the impact of common method bias via the statistical test developed by Harman (1976).…”

Section: Common Methods Biasmentioning

confidence: 99%

Strategic-Decision Quality in Public Organizations: An Information Processing Perspective

George

Desmidt

2016

Administration & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study draws on information processing theory to investigate predictors of strategic-decision quality in public organizations. Information processing theory argues that (a) rational planning practices contribute to strategic-decision quality by injecting information into decision-making and (b) decision-makers contribute to strategic-decision quality by exchanging information during decision-making. These assumptions are tested upon fifty-five Flemish pupil guidance centers. Rational planning practices are operationalized as strategic planning, performance measurement and performance management. Information exchange by decision-makers during decision-making is operationalized as procedural justice of the decision-making process. Results suggest that procedural justice, strategic planning and performance management contribute to strategic-decision quality while performance measurement does not. KeywordsRational planning, decision-making, strategic planning, performance measurement, performance management, procedural justice 2 IntroductionIn the slipstream of new public management, rational planning has conquered the public sector by storm (Boyne, 2001;Bryson, 2010). Rational planning is a theoretical framework of strategic management that centers on a rational approach to strategy formulation through strategic planning and strategy implementation through performance measurement and performance management (Andrews, Boyne, Law, & Walker, 2009b;Poister, Pitts, & Edwards, 2010). Rational planning has been the subject of several legislative provisions worldwide such as Best Value in the UK and the Government Performance and Results Act in the US (Bovaird, 2008; Boyne, GouldWilliams, Law, & Walker, 2004;Poister & Streib, 2005). Key to rational planning's popularity is the assumption that it contributes to strategic-decision quality in the public sector by offering a counterweight to political or intuitive decision-making (Boyne, 2001;Walker, Andrews, Boyne, Meier, & O'Toole, 2010). From an information processing perspective, this assumption is, at least theoretically, valid (Elbanna, 2006;Rogers, Miller, & Judge, 1999). Rational planning practices can inject information into decision-making processes by offering, for instance, focus on strategic goals, insights into the organizational environment, and insights into performance information (e.g. Boyne et al., 2004;Poister, 2005;Taylor, 2011).Although these theoretical arguments prompt the assumption that rational planning practices can be viewed as significant predictors of strategic-decision quality in public organizations, the validity of this assumption is debated. First, while several scholars have provided arguments for the effectiveness of rational planning practices in public organizations 2010). Second, the, albeit limited, empirical evidence on rational planning's effectiveness in public organizations has, so far, centered on performance-related outcomes (e.g. Andrews, Boyne, Law, & Walker, 2009a;Jung & Lee, 2013), while empirical studies focusing ...

show abstract

“…Also, although other studies have used similar strategies Kim 2005) there may be more variation within an organization than between them. On the other hand, this study provides a step forward by using more enhanced techniques such as fixed-effects regression which captures (and controls for) organizational levels of social desirability bias unless this changes over time (Cameron & Trivedi 2009;Jakobsen & Jensen 2015). Furthermore, individual level panels typically suffer from other methodological problems such as attrition and nonresponse bias and are substantively smaller samples than repeated cross-sectional analyses.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Panel analysis has thus been suggested as a very effective means to limit the common method bias typically associated with cross-sectional studies using self-perceived performance measures since such bias related to social desirability is assumed to be stable across time (Favero & Bullock 2014;Jakobsen & Jensen 2015). In this respect, our approach with aggregating data at the organizational level resembles Brewer's split sample method (2006) widely recognized as a means to deal with common method bias -here uniquely combined with a panel analysis (which is also the reason why we do not employ the split sample method in its original form).…”

Section: Statistical Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The role of public service motivation in performance. Examining the potentials and pitfalls through an institutional approach

2017

Bestuurskunde

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cover designEsther Ris, www.proefschriftomslag.nl Internal designMadelief Brandsma grafisch ontwerp, Arnhem English editingGiles Stacey, Englishworks PrefaceBeing a public service motivation (PSM) scholar is great. People seem to always think about your research topic -the motivational drive to contribute to society unselfishly, even being willing to sacrifice yourself for society -and have an opinion about it. For instance, whenever colleagues needed help they would immediately assume (and express) that I would help them because I am very public service motivated (just as someone studying consumerism in sports is a sports consumer and someone focusing on transparency is fully transparent… the force of logic is strong in science). Getting coffee is something I would of course sacrifice myself for -would it not contribute to society because coffee was essential for others to finish their PhD? Actually, on this last point I have to agree as the coffee trips to IJs& Zopie were crucial in finishing this book. Moreover, at parties when I would tell about my dissertation (yes, I go to very exciting parties!) and state that I study the motivation of public servants, the reaction was usually: "Then you must be finished quickly" followed by a rant on lazy and unresponsive public servants… Luckily, I found that these public servants were motivated enough that it remained interesting for me to study for four years (full-time!).A common question asked to any PhD is why? Why spend four years on one topic? And why this topic? As a student I wrote every paper on the European Union. I wrote my high school final project on the potential success and failure of the expansion of the European Union and my bachelor thesis on the (lack of) Europeanisation in Dutch municipalities. Then why switch to public service motivation? I guess the main reason is that I have always felt a fascination for those people in our society that try to make it a better place to live, sacrificing their time and energy often above what is asked of them, and even putting their lives on the line. I have heard them being described as self-interested, lazy bureaucrats but that was not my impression and I therefore wanted to know more about their drive to work for society. I have not been disappointed in that regard, as I have had the fortune to meet many inspiring public employees that do their work with incredible passion. What wondered me was the general proposition in the literature that highly public service motivated employees will perform better in their job than those with lower levels of PSM. Did it not matter what situation you are in? What would happen if a public servant that really wants to contribute to society does not feel able to do so through his or her work? We have all encountered situations in which we were motivated but were thwarted in reaching our goals.When finishing a PhD for instance, you encounter difficulties such as organizations that do not respond, time constraints and losing sight of the goal. The title of my research process co...

show abstract

Common Method Bias in Public Management Studies

Cited by 509 publications

References 55 publications

Sector Differences in the Public Service Motivation–Job Satisfaction Relationship: Exploring the Role of Organizational Characteristics

Sector Differences in the Public Service Motivation–Job Satisfaction Relationship: Exploring the Role of Organizational Characteristics

Strategic-Decision Quality in Public Organizations: An Information Processing Perspective

The role of public service motivation in performance. Examining the potentials and pitfalls through an institutional approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About