Public caseworkers' strategies coping with accountability demands

Hwang, Kwangseon; Han, Yousueng

doi:10.1002/pa.1669

Cited by 17 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In a study of non-executive boards, for instance, Roberts et al (2005, p. S16) found that some boards helped executives to “make as full a use as possible of the different views and experiences” leading to better decisions. In a very different study focusing on case workers, Hwang and Han (2017) found that accountability pressures had a positive effect on cognitive dimensions, such as “talk,” “discussion,” and “gathering of more information” (see also Belardinelli et al, 2018; Kogan, 2017). Interestingly, recent studies also relate integrative decision-making by managers to the “negativity bias” in their strategic environment, stimulating improved decisions (Holm, 2018; Nielsen & Moynihan, 2017).…”

Section: Information Processingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conflictual Accountability: Behavioral Responses to Conflictual Accountability of Agencies

Schillemans

Overman

Fawcett

et al. 2021

Administration & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In contemporary public governance, leaders of public organizations are faced with multiple, and oftentimes conflictual, accountability claims. Drawing upon a survey of CEO’s of agencies in seven countries, we explore whether and how conflictual accountability regimes relate to strategic behaviors by agency-CEO’s and their political principals. The presence of conflictual accountability is experienced as a major challenge and is associated with important behavioral responses by those CEO’s. This article demonstrates empirically how conflictual accountability is related to (a) controlling behaviors by principals, (b) constituency building behaviors by agencies, and (c) a general pattern of intensified contacts and information processing by both parties.

show abstract

Section: Information Processingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conflictual Accountability: Behavioral Responses to Conflictual Accountability of Agencies

Schillemans

Overman

Fawcett

et al. 2021

Administration & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Correspondingly, there has been a movement to balance compliance with a regulatory framework (i.e., performance) and an emphasis on professional commitment (i.e., accountability) (Casey Family Programs, 2011). The child welfare field entails a dynamic accountability and performance system (Hwang & Han, 2017). For instance, an emphasis on accountability derives from government (federal, state, and local), laws, policies, stakeholders, and citizens.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring the Sources of Cognitive Gap Between Accountability and Performance

Hwang

Han

2019

Public Personnel Management

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article decouples accountability and performance to highlight the cognitive gap in the ability to discern between accountability and performance at the street level. A qualitative content analysis of interviews from child welfare caseworkers provides several noteworthy findings. While these terms share certain common key themes, they also have different characteristics. Both terms may be understood and used interchangeably in practical applications, including serving (the children and families), responsible action (trust), following rules, completing the task, integrity/ethics, and effectiveness. Aside from the common key themes, accountability was also understood as embodying the key themes of explanation/meeting, expectation, and ownership. Conversely, performance was perceived as representing professionalism, skill, and teamwork. In general, when the frontline workers talk about process and relationships, they reference accountability and when they are discussing outcomes, they reference performance. This study highlights common and disparate characteristics associated with accountability and performance that explain why they are pursued simultaneously and why enhancing accountability sometimes does not lead to improving performance and vice versa.

show abstract

“…Not all empirical investigations find multiple accountabilities to be very problematic, however. In many instances, public sector actors have been found to develop strategic coping mechanisms to respond to the demands and expectations of their accountability forums, and have successfully integrated those into their workflow (Hwang, 2016;Hwang & Han, 2017;Schillemans, 2015;Schillemans & Bovens, 2011).…”

Section: Figure 11 Elements Of An Accountability Relationshipmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Gregory, 1998;Romzek & Dubnick, 1987;Romzek & Ingraham, 2000), as well as accounts of experiences and strategies for coping with the accountability pressures of various individuals within the public sector (e.g. Ewert, 2020;Hwang & Han, 2017;Schillemans, 2015).…”

Section: Figure 11 Elements Of An Accountability Relationshipmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Under Watchful Eyes

Aleksovska¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As a result, NASA's top managers set up an ambitious launch schedule, which was proving difficult to meet. The political pressure that NASA's top management was experiencing was transmitted down to lower levels of the bureaucratic hierarchy. The middle managers thus felt the burden not only of the expectations of their bureaucratic superiors, but also of the expectations of the agency's political principals. It was in this context that NASA's middle management decided that it was safe to proceed with the planned launch of the shuttle, and not to delay the process by resolving the technical issues the engineers raised. The middle management thus prioritized addressing the expectations stemming from the agency's political and bureaucratic accountability, at the expense of its professional accountability, ultimately leading to the disaster. This influential analysis of the Challenger accident encouraged numerous investigations of the accountability forces operating in the public sector in the decades to come. The simultaneous operation of multiple accountabilities, in particular, has garnered a lot of interest among public administration scholars (for example Koppell, 2005;Romzek & Ingraham, 2000;Schillemans & Bovens, 2011). But while the various accountability mechanisms have been carefully traced and categorized, their consequences on the decision-making behavior of individual public sector actors have been subjected to far less scholarly scrutiny (Schillemans, 2016;Yang, 2012). We thus have far less insight into why NASA's middle management decided to give priority to the demands of their political principals and hierarchical superiors, as opposed to the ones of the technical experts. The decision-making behavior of public sector actors under the pressure of accountability is therefore a central subject of investigation in this dissertation. IntroductionWhile public sector accountability mechanisms primarily operate at the organizational level, their effects reverberate through the various segments and individuals within organizations, as the case of the Challenger tragedy illustrates. Through board meetings, discussions in the media, or contacts with clients, the pressures of accountability expectations are felt by individual public sector managers and employees alike.Felt accountability, as psychologists have dubbed this (Hall et al., 2017), affects one's reasoning about the problem at hand, the calculations of priorities, the willingness to invest additional effort, or to take risks, and subsequently the decisions one makes and the behaviors one performs in the workplace (Lerner & Tetlock, 1999). These individual-level decisions and behaviors in turn shape the organizational outcomes. The meso and macro-level accountability pressures, external to the organization, are thus channeled through the micro-level within the organization, before they return meso or macro-level outcomes (Overman et al., 2020). To understand meso and macro-level outcomes in the public sector, it is therefore crucial to learn how the ind...

show abstract

Public caseworkers' strategies coping with accountability demands

Cited by 17 publications

References 27 publications

Conflictual Accountability: Behavioral Responses to Conflictual Accountability of Agencies

Conflictual Accountability: Behavioral Responses to Conflictual Accountability of Agencies

Exploring the Sources of Cognitive Gap Between Accountability and Performance

Under Watchful Eyes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About