Liderança no Judiciário: o reconhecimento de magistrados como líderes

Vieira, Luciano José Martins; Costa, Silvia Generali da

doi:10.1590/s0034-76122013000400006

Cited by 9 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Studies on the management of Brazilian courts have emphasized several themes, such as judges' leadership (Vieira & Costa, 2013), organizational learning (Capaverde & Vazquez, 2015), impact of new technologies (Freitas & Medeiros, 2015), adoption of administrative innovations (Guimaraes, Odelius, Medeiros, & Santana, 2011), among others. Despite the variety of issues addressed, little attention has been paid to the impact of the workforce available in the courts in the management of court caseload.…”

Section: Hypothesismentioning

confidence: 99%

Court Caseload Management: The Role of Judges and Administrative Assistants

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ResumoA gestão do acervo de processos pendentes em tribunais é essencial para garantir que os processos serão julgados de maneira célere, e isso depende de como juízes e assistentes administrativos lidam com suas cargas de trabalho. Resultados de diversos estudos indicam que um aumento no acervo de tribunais tende a gerar um aumento na produção judicial dos juízes. Entretanto alguns autores apontam que essa relação é mais complexa do que aparenta. No intuito de desenvolver um entendimento mais aprofundado dessa relação, é testado, neste trabalho, um conjunto de hipóteses diretas e de moderação. Foram utilizados dados secundários referentes a 566 juízes que trabalham em varas de primeira instância da Justiça Estadual de São Paulo, Brasil. Os resultados indicam uma relação direta e positiva entre o acervo da vara e a produção dos juízes, mas a força dessa relação varia de acordo com a especialidade da vara. Os resultados também mostram que a quantidade de assistentes administrativos, a experiência e os locais em que o juiz atua moderam a relação entre acervo e produção judicial. Os resultados contribuem para o desenvolvimento de estratégias gerenciais a fim de enfrentar o congestionamento de tribunais brasileiros.Palavras-chave: judiciário; gestão de tribunais; juízes; produção; acervo. AbstractCourt caseload management is of key importance for guaranteeing the adjudication of cases and depends on how judges and administrative assistants deal with their workload. Results from several studies indicate that an increase in court caseload tends to generate an increase in the judge's production. However, some authors argue that this relationship is far more complex. To develop a fuller understanding of this relationship we tested an array of direct and moderating hypotheses. We used secondary data from 566 judges working in first trial courts in the State Justice System of Sao Paulo, Brazil. The results indicate a direct and positive relationship between court caseload and judge production, but the strength of this relationship depends on court specialty. The findings also indicate that the number of administrative assistants, judge experience and the number of places a judge works all moderate the caseload-production relationship. The results contribute to the development of strategies to address the delays and congestion of courts, two of the main Brazilian Judiciary problems.

show abstract

Section: Hypothesismentioning

confidence: 99%

Court Caseload Management: The Role of Judges and Administrative Assistants

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, since management and leadership are presented as distinct concepts (Turner et al, 2009;Vieira & Costa, 2013), we chose to adopt the term management in this research. It is important to point out that the concept of management is associated with a sponsor's position since this person performs tasks and has certain responsibilities.…”

Section: Project Management Styles Of the Sponsorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of sponsor's management style in project prioritization

Rodrigues

Silva

2020

JIEM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is understand how the different styles of sponsor management influence the prioritization of projects.Design/methodology/approach: The empiric analysis used in-depth interviews with 11 executives as method for data collection and qualitative content analysis using theory and data driven categories for analysis is performed.Findings: This research points to the emergence of opportunistic management style, and to evidences of lack of strategic alignment in the project prioritization process.Research limitations/implications: The lack of prioritization methods evidences to compare with project management style. Also, the number of project managers to interview as experts.Practical implications: The analysis shows that committees and post-project evaluation be established to mitigate failures in the prioritization process impacted from sponsor’s management styles influence.Originality/value: The paper provides a critical perspective about sponsor’s management styles and project prioritization context; it is important to highlight how different management styles of the sponsor result in different behaviors in the companies.

show abstract

“…However, there is a need to reconcile these different roles, especially the judicial and managerial ones. The search for such resolution can generate several conflicts, as has been pointed out by studies carried out in Brazil on the work of judges (Teixeira, 2012;Vieira and Costa, 2013;CNJ, 2015;Gomes et al, 2016).…”

Section: Role Conflict and Role Ambiguity: Implications For Judges' Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This lack of training results from several factors, including the lack of initiative from judges themselves to acquire managerial capacities and inadequate or non-existent judiciary policies for training judges (Vieira and Costa, 2013). Despite the lack of skills to handle administrative tasks, judges need to perform the activities associated with the managerial role.…”

Section: Role Conflict and Role Ambiguity: Implications For Judges' Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conflitos e ambiguidades de papéis no trabalho de juízes: as percepções de juízes portugueses

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The reform of the judiciaries of several countries have created a new role for judges, a managerial role, in which judges assume new management responsibilities. This new role is different from the traditional one which focused on judicial tasks, and has generated conflict and ambiguity in the work of judges. This study aims to identify and discuss the conflicts and ambiguities between the judicial and administrative roles performed by Portuguese judges. The research took place in Portugal over the period between 2013 and 2014, and data was collected from in-depth interviews with 12 judges. The research identifies several areas of role conflict and ambiguity in the judges' work. The main conflicts are: incompatibility between the carrying out of judicial and management activities; high workload and insufficient and unmotivated administrative staff; the need to maintain both productivity and judicial quality; and the great responsibility of the position but poor remuneration. The main ambiguities reported are: the formal relationship between judges and administrative officials; the judge's function in the process of court planning; the criteria for the distribution of judicial proceedings among judges; and the criteria to evaluate judges' performance. These results are discussed and a research agenda is suggested. Keywords: judicial management; judge; social role; role conflict; role ambiguity. Conflitos e ambiguidades de papéis no trabalho de juízes: as percepções de juízes portuguesesReformas em judiciários de diversos países criaram um novo papel para os juízes, um papel gerencial, em que juízes assumem novas responsabilidades relacionadas às atividades administrativas. Esse novo papel é diferente do papel tradicional, focado em tarefas judiciais e tem gerado conflitos no trabalho de juízes. Com base nesse contexto, o presente estudo tem como objetivo identificar e discutir conflitos e ambiguidades envolvendo os papéis judicial e gerencial, desempenhados por juízes de Portugal. A pesquisa foi realizada em Portugal, entre 2013 e 2014, e os dados foram coletados por meio de entrevistas em profundidade com 12 juízes. Os principais conflitos são: incompatibilidade entre a realização de atividades judiciais e administrativas; carga de trabalho elevada e RAP | Role conflict and role ambiguity in the work of judges: the perceptions of Portuguese judges 928 equipe administrativa insuficiente e desmotivada; produtividade versus qualidade do trabalho judicial; e alta responsabilidade do cargo e baixo salário. As principais ambiguidades identificadas nas entrevistas referem-se a: relação formal entre juízes e pessoal administrativo; função do juiz no processo de planejamento dos tribunais; o critério para distribuição de processos judiciais entre juízes; e o critério de avaliação do desempenho de juízes. Os resultados são discutidos e sugeridas pesquisas adicionais. Palavras-chave: administração da justiça; juiz; papel social; conflito de papéis; ambiguidade de papéis. Conflictos y ambigüedades entre los papeles de juece...

show abstract

Liderança no Judiciário: o reconhecimento de magistrados como líderes

Cited by 9 publications

References 8 publications

Court Caseload Management: The Role of Judges and Administrative Assistants

Court Caseload Management: The Role of Judges and Administrative Assistants

Influence of sponsor's management style in project prioritization

Conflitos e ambiguidades de papéis no trabalho de juízes: as percepções de juízes portugueses

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About