Politicization, Bureaucratic Legalism, and Innovative Attitudes in the Public Sector

Abstract

Previous studies have identified institutional, organizational, and individual factors that promote innovation in public organizations. Yet they have overlooked how the type of public administration-and the type of administrators-is associated with innovative attitudes. Using two large, unique comparative data sets on public bureaucracies and public managers, this article examines how bureaucratic politicization and legalistic features are associated with senior public managers' attitudes toward innovation in 19 European countries. Results of multilevel analysis indicate that the bureaucratic politicization of an administration and the law background of public managers matter. Public managers working in politicized administrations and those whose education includes a law degree exhibit lower pro-innovation attitudes (i.e., receptiveness to new ideas and creative solutions and change orientation). Evidence for Practice• Senior public managers' attitudes toward innovation vary significantly across countries.• The results of this study indicate that the features of a national bureaucracy and the educational background of public managers matter for pro-innovation attitudes. • Senior managers working in more politicized bureaucracies and those with a legal education background show lower tolerance for new ideas and creative solutions, and they are less willing to take actions that might upset the status quo. • Policy makers should consider personnel systems and the individual educational background of civil servants as significant factors that encourage favorable attitudes toward innovation.

Public sector innovation in the Asia‐pacific trends, challenges, and opportunities

“…Indeed, in recent years, innovation has become a core topic of study in public management, public administration, and public policy (e.g. see De Vries et al., 2016; De Vries, Tummers, & Bekkers, 2018; Demircioglu & Audretsch, 2017; Hartley, 2015; Hartley, Sørensen, & Torfing, 2013; Lapuente & Suzuki, 2020; Osborne & Brown, 2011; Osborne, Brown, & Walker, 2017).…”

Revisiting the old debate: citizens’ perceptions of meritocracy in public and private organizations

“…We argue that sector differences in meritocracy should be high in countries where closed bureaucratic structures remain strong. Closed bureaucracies tend to be highly legalistic, with strictly regulated and formalized entry and promotion systems (Lapuente and Suzuki 2020). In highly formalized systems, little flexibility exists in how a decision is made or what outcomes are due in a given situation; procedures and rewards are dictated by rules (Schminke, Ambrose, and Cropanzano 2000, 96).…”

Politics, Competence, and Performance: Evidence from the US State Budget Agencies

“…Wood and Lewis (2017) find that politicized federal agencies respond more slowly to public information requests, indicating poor management performance. Lapuente and Suzuki (2020) find that the politicization of bureaucracies is associated with lower pro‐innovation attitudes. Nonetheless, Mikesell and Ross (2014) find that the politicization of state revenue forecasts contributes to forecast acceptance, implying one positive performance impact of politicization.…”