'Supranationalism' in Question: Beliefs, Values, and the Socializing Power of the European Commission Revisited

Abstract

Do international organizations affect the views of the people who work for them? Although increasingly sophisticated methods have been used to address this question, disagreement persists about whether the beliefs of staff are formed before they join, after they enter the institution, or are shaped by instrumental calculation. Drawing on an original dataset based on the first fully representative survey of the European Commission's workforce, this article breaks new ground by putting different definitions of ‘supranationalism’ to the test and by capturing multiple ways in which individuals may be affected by the experience of working for the organization. For the first time, it demonstrates that commitment to ‘supranationalism’ varies between Commission staff groupings, that the influences on belief vary with the measure of ‘supranationalism’ used, and that both post‐recruitment experience and pre‐recruitment roles play a part in shaping beliefs.

Comparing the autonomy of international public administrations: An ideal‐type approach

“…In order to capture the capacity of the secretariat to develop distinct preferences, administrative differentiation is operationalized by taking into account the employment history of the SG and independent research capacities. The first indicator is based on a ‘post‐recruitment socialization effect’, which is found to systematically influence the identity of European (Connolly and Kassim ) and international civil servants (Mele et al ). SGs who have previously worked as civil servants in the IPA they now lead are more likely to defend the secretariat's position against undue political pressure.…”

How pre‐ and postrecruitment factors shape role perceptions of European Commission officials

“…From the perspective of any—public as well as private—organization, this raises two important questions. The first is whether “staff express the organizational values embodied by their institutions” (Connolly & Kassim, , p. 717). International civil servants, for instance, can be expected to execute their tasks differently depending on whether they uphold nationally oriented norms, values, goals, and codes of conduct (i.e., an intergovernmental role perception) rather than those oriented toward a mission and vision independent from particular national interests (i.e., a supranational role perception).…”

“…This question has triggered a substantial—and as yet unresolved—academic debate. Extensive disagreement indeed “persists about whether the beliefs of staff are formed before they join, after they enter the institution, or are shaped by instrumental calculation” (Connolly & Kassim, , p. 717). The vast literature on the European Commission (henceforth Commission) provides an illustrative example.…”

“…Clearly, such an either/or approach is likely to be overly restrictive—or, at least, should be open to further theoretical and empirical scrutiny (Connolly & Kassim, ). The first contribution in this article is to set out a framework incorporating both prerecruitment (extraorganizational) and post‐recruitment (intraorganizational) factors affecting actors' role perceptions.…”

“…This provides a unique opportunity to derive novel and testable propositions about whether pre‐ or postrecruitment factors are more strongly linked to particular role perceptions. Connolly and Kassim () likewise develop an empirical model covering both pre‐and postrecruitment explanatory factors of Commission officials' roles. Yet, their analysis—in line with much of the foregoing literature on the Commission—is limited to “different definitions of supranationalism” (Connolly & Kassim, , p. 717), and thus cannot address the relative importance of pre‐ and postrecruitment factors for distinct role perceptions.…”