Governing by carrot and stick: a genealogy of the incentive

Dix, Guus

doi:10.23941/ejpe.v7i2.180

Cited by 19 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 74 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In a practical sense, leaders will need to adapt their behaviour and learn (Ham, 2011). Learning theory highlights that “the carrot is more effective than the stick” ( Dix, 2014 ) so a rebalancing of the punitive culture in Irish health care and the introduction of new incentives will be useful, as it has been elsewhere ( Fitzpatrick and Riordan, 2016 ). However, this process cannot be taken for granted.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Leadership and community healthcare reform: a study using the Competing Values Framework (CVF)

O'Neill

Vries

Comiskey

2021

LHS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The Health Service Executive in Ireland seeks to further develop healthcare in the community. It has identified that this reform requires developing leadership amongst the staff. This study aims to identify what kind of leadership staff in community healthcare observe in practice and their leadership preferences. The core objective has been to identify the readiness of the organisation to implement the adopted national policy of integrated community care reform in terms of leadership development. Design/methodology/approach An online cross-sectional survey was conducted using the Organisational Cultural Assessment Instrument, based on the Competing Values Framework. This tool identifies four overarching leadership types: Clan (Collaborative), Adhocracy (Creative), Market (Competitive) and Hierarchy (Controlling). Participants (n = 445) were a representative sample of regional community health care employees. They were asked to identify presently observed leadership and preferred leadership in practice. The statistical analysis emphasised a comparison of observed and preferred leadership types. Findings Participants reported the current prevailing leadership type as Market (M = 34.38, SD = 6.22) and Hierarchical (M = 34.38, SD = 22.62), whilst the preferred or future style was overwhelmingly Clan (M = 40.38, SD = 18.08). Differences were significant (all p’s < 0.001). The overall outcome indicates a predominance of controlling and competitive leadership and a lack of collaborative leadership to implement the planned reform. Originality/value During reform in healthcare, leadership in practice must be aligned to the reform strategy, demonstrating collaboration, flexibility and support for innovation. This unique study demonstrates the importance of examining leadership type and competencies to indicate readiness to deliver national community health care reform.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Leadership and community healthcare reform: a study using the Competing Values Framework (CVF)

O'Neill

Vries

Comiskey

2021

LHS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…First, the European Commission and its Member States do not govern with the 'stick-type' authoritarianism we associate with the Soviet Union, for instance, and hence RRI is not catapulted at those who have a stake in R&I as were the aforementioned planning disasters. Instead of forcing scientists to engage in RRI, those working in R&I are rather induced into becoming more responsible, more in the way of carrots (Dix, 2014). Changing funding schemes 10 (e.g.…”

Section: Tensions In Prrimentioning

confidence: 99%

Technocracy versus experimental learning in RRI

Klaassen¹,

Rijnen²,

Vermeulen³

et al. 2018

Responsible Research and Innovation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

General rightsCopyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.• Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal ? Take down policyIf you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.

show abstract

“…Finding the right mix of interventions that speak to such intelligence on the ground is important to better understand the complexities of the relationships among human motivations, agent choices, and forest conservation. Expectations of strict obedience, for example, are widely recognized as lessening higher human capacities, such as independence and creativity and the ability to solve problems [131].…”

Section: Subjects and Justifications: What Do Rewards And Punishmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond Rewards and Punishments in the Brazilian Amazon: Practical Implications of the REDD+ Discourse

Gebara

Agrawal

2017

Forests

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Through different policies and measures reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation and enhancing conservation (REDD+) has grown into a way to induce behavior change of forest managers and landowners in tropical countries. We argue that debates around REDD+ in Brazil have typically highlighted rewards and punishments, obscuring other core interventions and strategies that are also critically important to reach the goal of reducing deforestation, supporting livelihoods, and promoting conservation (i.e., technology transfer and capacity building). We adopt Foucault's concepts of governmentality and technologies of governance to provide a reading of the REDD+ discourse in Brazil and to offer an historical genealogy of the rewards and punishments approach. By analyzing practical elements from REDD+ implementation in the Brazilian Amazon, our research provides insights on the different dimensions in which smallholders react to rewards and punishments. In doing so, we add to the debate on governmentality, supplementing its focus on rationalities of governance with attention to the social practices in which such rationalities are embedded. Our research also suggests that the techniques of remuneration and coercion on which a rewards and punishments approach relies are only supporting limited behavioral changes on the ground, generating negative adaptations of deforestation practices, reducing positive feedbacks and, perhaps as importantly, producing only short-term outcomes at the expense of positive long-term land use changes. Furthermore, the approach ignores local heterogeneities and the differences between the agents engaging in forest clearing in the Amazon. The practical elements of the REDD+ discourse in Brazil suggest the rewards and punishments approach profoundly limits our understanding of human behavior by reducing the complex and multi-dimensional to a linear and rational simplicity. Such simplification leads to an underestimation of smallholders' capacity to play a key role in climate mitigation and adaptation. We conclude by highlighting the importance of looking at local heterogeneities and capacities and the need to promote trust, altruism and responsibility towards others and future generations.

show abstract

Governing by carrot and stick: a genealogy of the incentive

Cited by 19 publications

References 74 publications

Leadership and community healthcare reform: a study using the Competing Values Framework (CVF)

Leadership and community healthcare reform: a study using the Competing Values Framework (CVF)

Technocracy versus experimental learning in RRI

Beyond Rewards and Punishments in the Brazilian Amazon: Practical Implications of the REDD+ Discourse

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About