The effects of public service motivation, risk propensity and risk perception on defensive decision-making in public administrations

Abstract

PurposeDrawing on the literature on public service motivation, the authors investigate the relationship between public service motivation and defensive decision-making. Further, the authors explore risk propensity and risk perception as potential antecedents of defensive decision-making.Design/methodology/approachBased on survey data from 144 German public financial managers of municipalities and federal agencies, the authors find no significant direct relationship between public service motivation and defensive decision-making.FindingsHowever, the authors can show that risk propensity fully mediates the relationship between public service motivation and defensive decision-making. The findings also indicate that beyond the public service motivation and individual risk propensity of public financial managers, their risk perception does influence their decision making.Originality/valueThe study makes three contributions to the literature. First, the authors contribute to the relatively small amount of research on the risk-taking behaviour of public managers by explaining the indirect impact of PSM on their risk-taking behaviour. Second, this paper furthers the understanding of the influence of risk perception and risk propensity on decision-making and enhances the models of Sitkin and Pablo (1992) and Sitkin and Weingart (1995). Third, the paper also contributes to the call for more international research on German public administrations.

Fostering innovative behaviours of public sector employees: the potency of innovation-based HR practices, risk propensity and error tolerance

“…, 2015) and validates the trait activation theory (Tett and Burnett, 2003). The significant mediating effect of risk propensity notably is inconsistent with the evidence in the public sector literature that indicates that public sector employees tend to be risk averse (Dong, 2017; Schäfer et al. , 2023), raising the issue of why such is the case in our study.…”

“…Our finding supports past studies (Craig, 2015;Garc ıa-Granero et al, 2015) and validates the trait activation theory (Tett and Burnett, 2003). The significant mediating effect of risk propensity notably is inconsistent with the evidence in the public sector literature that indicates that public sector employees tend to be risk averse (Dong, 2017;Sch€ afer et al, 2023), raising the issue of why such is the case in our study. One key explanation could be the strong backing of the UAE government for the national agenda to create and deliver the best public value to its citizens and become the most innovative government in the world (Almazrouei et al, 2023).…”

Nuevas barreras burocráticas: la Administración defensiva digital

“…No obstante, el mismo autor advierte de su insuficiencia explicativa de la realidad. Y es que una aproximación holística al fenómeno no puede hurtar la consideración de vectores como la motivación y la cultura del servicio público (Vandenabeele y Schott, 2020), la relación psico-afectiva con el riesgo (Schäfer, Hirsch, y Nitzl, 2022) y otras perspectivas del comportamiento (Gracia, Peiró y Mañas, 2007).…”

“…La situación en Italia, donde el debate sobre la burocracia defensiva está omnipresente, se ha centrado en las primeras, aunque también se ha apuntado a razones sociológicas para explicar por ejemplo el recelo ante la delación anónima. Por su parte, el caso francés podría estar indicando Boto Álvarez, Alejandra Nuevas barreras burocráticas: la Administración defensiva digital que no son menores las cuestiones de motivación y cultura del servicio público, aunque algunos estudios focalizados en las Administraciones de otras latitudes han apuntado la importancia diferencial del elemento de percepción individual del riesgo (Schäfer, Hirsch, y Nitzl, 2022). Entre nosotros, también se ha señalado ya que la lucha contra la corrupción, la desidia y la incompetencia, de la mano del principio de responsabilidad, debe abordar tanto al sujeto actuante como al contexto organizativo-institucional, y las interacciones entre ellos (Lifante Vidal, 2020, p. 44).…”