The (un)intended effects of street-level bureaucrats’ enforcement style: Do citizens shame or obey bureaucrats?

Boer, Noortje de

doi:10.1177/0952076720905005

Cited by 7 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 62 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Political considerations influence bureaucrats' behavior (Wood and Waterman, 1993) and affect those who operate at the street level (May and Winter, 2009). Street-level bureaucrats are dominant players in the public service environment, with extensive discretion that allows them to influence significant aspects of citizens' lives (de Boer, 2020;Lipsky, 2010;Lavee and Strier, 2019). Their decisions shape the distribution of resources in society and have a strong impact on social equity (Ca´rdenas and Ram ırez de la Cruz, 2017;Maynard-Moody and Musheno, 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Politicians’ involvement in street-level policy implementation: Implications for social equity

Davidovitz

Cohen

2021

Public Policy and Administration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study explores whether elected officials’ involvement in the way street-level bureaucrats implement policy affects social equity. This question is addressed empirically through interviews and focus groups with 84 Israeli educators and social workers. Findings indicate that elected officials involve themselves directly and indirectly in street-level bureaucrats’ policy implementation and their involvement reduces social equity in the provision of services. The study contributes to the literature on policy implementation by enabling a deeper understanding of the factors that shape the decision-making process of street-level bureaucrats when providing services and their ultimate impact on policy outcomes.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Politicians’ involvement in street-level policy implementation: Implications for social equity

Davidovitz

Cohen

2021

Public Policy and Administration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…How do citizens assess the bureaucrats they meet? Understanding how citizens assess street‐level bureaucrats is important because citizens are not passive actors during service provision (de Boer ; Dubois ; Gofen ). Variations in assessments of bureaucrats by citizens may have implications for service provision generally and for the behavior of citizens during bureaucrat‐citizen encounters specifically.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

How Do Citizens Assess Street‐Level Bureaucrats’ Warmth and Competence? A Typology and Test

Boer

2020

Public Administration Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Citizens encounter many street‐level bureaucrats in their lifetime. How do they assess the traits of the bureaucrats they meet? Understanding citizens’ assessments of bureaucrats is important, because citizens are not passive receivers of policies. This article explores citizens’ classifications of street‐level bureaucrats based on their core task. Using a factorial survey (n = 580), three clusters of bureaucrats are identified: those who are regulation oriented, those who are service oriented, and those who are both regulation and service oriented. Then, the article tests how these three types of bureaucrats are assessed on warmth and competence and whether their gender matters. A between‐subjects experiment (n = 1,602) reveals that regulation‐oriented bureaucrats are assessed as least competent and warm. Moreover, regardless of core task, female bureaucrats are assessed as warmer than males. Female and male bureaucrats are assessed as equally competent. This article shows that bureaucrats are stereotyped by citizens and discusses the implications for the public management literature. Evidence for Practice While researchers and practitioners tend to focus on commonalities between street‐level bureaucrats, focusing on differences—for instance, in terms of core task and gender—may be helpful to understand how citizens see and react to their encounters with bureaucrats. Much like street‐level bureaucrats’ stereotypical notions of citizens, citizens stereotype the bureaucrats they encounter. These stereotypes are based on cues related to the bureaucrats’ core task and gender. Especially for regulation‐oriented organizations and street‐level bureaucrats, such as inspectorates, being aware of stereotypes may be useful when engaging with citizens because they are rated as the least competent and warm.

show abstract

“…Second, this study also contributes to the literature on SLBs by expanding existing knowledge about the relationship between their discretion and work routines, and the perceptions and behaviors of citizens (de Boer, 2020a; de Boer, 2020b). Previous studies have focused on what happens during encounters with SLBs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 89%

“…By focusing on the public's experiences, rather than the outcome of the interaction, we hope to better characterize the relationship between citizens and SLBs and shed further light on the factors leading to vigilantism (Delmas, 2018). Second, this study also expands the existing knowledge about the relationship between SLBs’ discretion and work routines, on the one hand, and the perceptions and behaviors of their clients on the other (de Boer, 2020a; de Boer, 2020b). Our third contribution is empirical.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 77%

“…The public administration literature acknowledges that SLBs’ coping mechanisms influence policy outcomes, beyond the organization's procedures, and sometimes in stark contrast to them (Cohen, 2021; Davidovitz & Cohen, 2020; Lavee, 2020). Yet, there is limited research about the impact of these coping mechanisms on citizens’ perceptions and behavior (de Boer, 2020a; de Boer, 2020b). The literature from related disciplines refers to procedural justice, an element related to the degree of fairness in the process of allocating public goods (Tyler, 1990).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Procedural Justice and the Unintended Role of Street-Level Bureaucrats in Prompting Citizens to Act as Vigilantes

Edri‐Peer

Cohen

2023

The American Review of Public Administration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What role do the perceptions of clients about the procedural justice that street-level bureaucrats (SLBs) use when implementing policy play in prompting citizens to engage in vigilante actions? Using qualitative methods, we examine the unintended effects of SLBs’ implementation of policy on citizens’ vigilantism. We contribute to the literature by showing that procedural justice on the street level is in fact an important factor in citizens’ decisions to act as vigilantes. Our findings identified three significant factors in these decisions: the citizens’ ability to voice their complaint, the sense that they were treated respectfully and their trust that the police officers would do what they could to deal with their complaint. Furthermore, we also demonstrated that citizens and SLBs do not share the same perceptions of the role of the police as service providers, and that this gap increases citizens’ motivations to act independently.

show abstract

The (un)intended effects of street-level bureaucrats’ enforcement style: Do citizens shame or obey bureaucrats?

Cited by 7 publications

References 62 publications

Politicians’ involvement in street-level policy implementation: Implications for social equity

Politicians’ involvement in street-level policy implementation: Implications for social equity

How Do Citizens Assess Street‐Level Bureaucrats’ Warmth and Competence? A Typology and Test

Procedural Justice and the Unintended Role of Street-Level Bureaucrats in Prompting Citizens to Act as Vigilantes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About