Given the crucial role of bureaucrats in determining the success of participatory policy-making efforts, understanding the factors that influence their beliefs about public participation is an important research goal. Building on public service motivation (PSM) and organizational echelons theory, this study develops a model of perceived participation efficacy for civil servants and tests it using data from a survey of South Korean central government employees. Ordered logistic regression analysis suggests that PSM plays a differential role in determining beliefs about participation across organizational strata. Monte Carlo simulations are used to better understand this effect. The results suggest that PSM is a significant factor in determining perceived participation efficacy for high-level civil servants but plays little role for lower level, frontline employees. A number of implications of this study, as well as directions for future research, are discussed.
AikenL. S.WestS. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
2.
AllisonP. D. (2012). Logistic regression using SAS: Theory and application. Cary, NC: SAS Institute.
3.
AmsdenA. H. (1992). Asia’s next giant: South Korea and late industrialization. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
4.
AndrewsR.BoyneG. A.LawJ.WalkerR. M. (2007). Centralization, Organizational Strategy, and Public Service Performance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 19(1), 57-80.
5.
BeierleT. C. (1999). Using social goals to evaluate public participation in environmental decisions. Review of Policy Research, 16(3-4), 75-103.
6.
BenderR.GrouvenU. (1998). Using binary logistic regression models for ordinal data with non-proportional odds. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 51, 809-816.
7.
BozemanB.KingsleyG. (1998). Risk culture in public and private organizations. Public Administration Review, 58, 109-118.
8.
BozemanB.RaineyH. G. (1998). Organizational rules and the “Bureaucratic Personality.”American Journal of Political Science, 42(1), 163-189.
9.
BozemanB.ScottP. (1996). Bureaucratic red tape and formalization: Untangling conceptual knots. The American Review of Public Administration, 26, 1-17.
10.
BrantR. (1990). Assessing proportionality in the proportional odds model for ordinal logistic regression. Biometrics, 46, 1171-1178.
11.
BrewerG. A. (2005). In the eye of the storm: Frontline supervisors and federal agency performance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15, 505-527.
12.
BrewerG. A.SeldenS. C. (1998). Whistle blowers in the federal civil service: New evidence of the public service ethic. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 8, 413-440.
13.
CampbellJ. W.ImT. (2015). PSM and turnover intention in public organizations: Does change-oriented organizational citizenship behavior play a role?Review of Public Personnel Administration. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/0734371X14567366
ChenC. A.HsiehC. W.ChenD. Y. (2014). Fostering public service motivation through workplace trust: Evidence from public managers in Taiwan. Public Administration, 92, 954-973.
16.
ChibberV. (1999). Building a developmental state: The Korean case reconsidered. Politics & Society, 27, 309-346.
17.
ChoS.ImT. (2010). Korean public organization [Hanguk Haengjong Jojikron.]. Paju, South Korea: Minjungseorim Bobmunsa.
18.
ChunY. H.RaineyH. (2005). Goal ambiguity in U.S. Federal Agencies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15, 1-30.
19.
CourseyD.YangK.PandeyS. K. (2012). Public service motivation (PSM) and support for citizen participation: A test of Perry and Vandenabeele’s reformulation of PSM theory. Public Administration Review, 72,572-582.
20.
CrozierM. (1964). The bureaucratic phenomenon. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
21.
EbdonC.FranklinA. (2004). Searching for a role for citizens in the budget process. Public Budgeting & Finance, 24(1), 32-49.
22.
FeeneyM. K. (2012). Organizational red tape: A measurement experiment. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 22, 427-444.
23.
FeldmanM. S.KhademianA. M. (2002). To manage is to govern. Public Administration Review, 62, 541-554.
24.
FungA.WrightE. O. (2003). Thinking about empowered participatory governance. In FungA.WrightE. O. (Eds.), Deepening democracy: Innovations in empowered participatory governance (pp. 3-42). New York, NY: Verso.
25.
HageJ.AikenM. (1967). Relationship of centralization to other structural properties. Administrative Science Quarterly, 12, 72-92.
26.
HageJ.AikenM. (1969). Routine technology, social structure, and organization goals. Administrative Science Quarterly, 14, 366-376.
27.
ImT. (2003). Bureaucratic power and the NPM reforms in Korea. International Review of Public Administration, 8(1), 89-102.
28.
ImT. (2014). Bureaucracy in three different worlds: The assumptions of failed public sector reforms in Korea. Public Organization Review, 14, 577-596.
29.
ImT.CampbellJ. W.ChaS. (2013). Revisiting Confucian bureaucracy: Roots of the Korean government’s culture and competitiveness. Public Administration and Development, 33, 286-296.
30.
IrvinR. A.StansburyJ. (2004). Citizen participation in decision making: Is it worth the effort?Public Administration Review, 64, 55-65.
31.
KimD. H.CampbellJ. W. (2015). Development, diversification, and legitimacy: Emergence of the committee-based administrative model in South Korea. Public Organization Review, 15, 551-564.
32.
KimJ. H. (2003). Assessing practical significance of the proportional odds assumption. Statistics & Probability Letters, 65, 233-239.
33.
KimP. S. (2012). The Civil Service System in the Republic of Korea. In BermanE. M.MoonM. J.ChoiH. (Eds.), Public administration in East Asia (pp. 451-472). Boca Raton: CRC Press.
34.
KimS.VandenabeeleW. (2010). A strategy for building public service motivation research internationally. Public Administration Review, 70, 701-709.
35.
KingC. S.FelteyK. M.SuselB. O. (1998). The question of participation: Toward authentic public participation in public administration. Public Administration Review, 58, 383-400.
36.
KingG.TomzM.WittenbergJ. (2000). Making the most of statistical analyses: Improving interpretation and presentation. American Journal of Political Science, 44(2), 347-361.
37.
KweitM. G.KweitR. W. (1981). Implementing citizen participation in a bureaucratic society: A contingency approach. New York: Praeger Publishers.
38.
KweitM. G.KweitR. W. (1984). The politics of policy analysis: The role of citizen participation in analytic decisionmaking. Review of Policy Research, 3, 234-245.
39.
LahT. J. (2010). Public policy processes and citizen participation in South Korea. In BermanE. M.MoonM. J.ChoiH. (Eds.), Public administration in East Asia (pp. 355-376). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
40.
LeeJ. (2014). Public meetings for efficient administrative performance in the United States. Public Performance & Management Review, 37, 388-411.
41.
LipskyM. (1980). Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public services. New York, NY: Russell Sage.
42.
LongJ. S. (1997). Regression models for categorical and limited dependent variables. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
43.
MacNairR. H.CaldwellR.PollaneL. (1983). Citizen participants in public bureaucracies: Foul-weather friends. Administration & Society, 14, 507-524.
44.
MathewsF. D. (1999). Politics for people: Finding a responsible public voice. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
45.
MayerR. C.DavisJ. H.SchoormanF. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20, 709-734.
46.
MertonR. K. (1940). Bureaucratic structure and personality. Social Forces, 18, 560-568.
47.
MichelsA. (2011). Innovations in democratic governance: How does citizen participation contribute to a better democracy?International Review of Administrative Sciences, 77, 275-293.
48.
MoynihanD. P. (2003). Normative and instrumental perspectives on public participation. American Review of Public Administration, 33, 164-188.
49.
NeshkovaM. I. (2014). Does agency autonomy foster public participation?Public Administration Review, 74, 64-74.
50.
NeshkovaM. I.GuoH. (2012). Public participation and organizational performance: Evidence from state agencies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 22, 267-288.
51.
PandeyS. K.CourseyD. H.MoynihanD. P. (2007). Organizational effectiveness and bureaucratic red tape: A multimethod study. Public Performance & Management Review, 30, 398-425.
52.
PandeyS. K.ScottP. G. (2002). Red tape: A review and assessment of concepts and measures. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 12, 553-580.
53.
PandeyS. K.WrightB. E. (2006). Connecting the dots in public management: Political environment, organizational goal ambiguity, and the public manager’s role ambiguity. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 16, 511-532.
54.
ParkC. O.JooJ. (2010). Control over the Korean bureaucracy: A review of the NPM Civil Service Reforms under the Roh Moo-Hyun government. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 30, 189-210.
55.
PayneR. L.MansfieldR. (1973). Relationships of perceptions of organizational climate to organizational structure, context, and hierarchical position. Administrative Science Quarterly, 18, 515-526.
56.
PerryJ. L. (1996). Measuring public service motivation: An assessment of construct reliability and validity. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 6, 5-22.
57.
PerryJ. L.HondeghemA. (2008). Motivation in public management: The call of public service. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
58.
PerryJ. L.VandenabeeleW. (2008). Behavioral dynamics: Institutions, identities, and self-regulation. In PerryL.HondeghemA. (Eds.), Motivation in public management: The call of public service (pp. 56-79). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
59.
PerryJ. L.WiseL. R. (1990). The motivational bases of public service. Public Administration Review, 50, 367-373.
60.
PetriwskyjA. M.WarburtonJ.EveringhamJ.CuthillM. (2014). Seniors’ motivations for participation in local governance: Evidence from an Australian study. Local Government Studies, 40, 240-263.
61.
RaineyH. G.JungC. S. (2015). A conceptual framework for analysis of goal ambiguity in public organizations. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25, 71-99.
62.
SchlozmanK. L.BurnsN.VerbaS.DonahueJ. (1995). Gender and citizen participation: Is there a different voice?American Journal of Political, 39, 267-293.
63.
ScottP. G.PandeyS. K. (2005). Red tape and public service motivation: Findings from a national survey of managers in state health and human services agencies. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 25, 155-180.
StazykE. C.GoerdelH. T. (2011). The benefits of bureaucracy: Public managers’ perceptions of political support, goal ambiguity, and organizational effectiveness. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21, 645-672.
66.
StazykE. C.PandeyS. K.WrightB. E. (2011). Understanding affective organizational commitment: The importance of institutional context. The American Review of Public Administration, 41, 603-624.
67.
StiversC. (1994). The listening bureaucrat: Responsiveness in public administration. Public Administration Review, 54, 364-369.
68.
ThomasJ. C. (1995). Public participation in public decisions: New skills and strategies for public managers. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
69.
ThompsonV. A. (1963). Modern organization. New York, NY: Alfred A. Knopf.
70.
ThomsonA. M.PerryJ. L. (2006). Collaboration processes: Inside the black box. Public Administration Review, 66(suppl. 1), 20-32.
71.
TomzM.WittenbergJ.KingG. (2001). CLARIFY: Software for interpreting and presenting statistical results. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University. Retrieved from http://gking.harvard.edu/files/clarify.pdf
72.
WalkerR. M.BrewerG. A. (2008). An organizational echelon analysis of the determinants of red tape in public organizations. Public Administration Review, 68, 1112-1127.
73.
WalkerR. M.EnticottG. (2004). Using multiple informants in public administration: Revisiting the managerial values and actions debate. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 14, 417-434.
74.
WangX.Van WartM. (2007). When public participation in administration leads to trust: An empirical assessment of managers’ perceptions. Public Administration Review, 67, 265-278.
75.
WilliamsR. (2006). Generalized ordered logit/partial proportional odds models for ordinal dependent variables. The Stata Journal, 6, 58-82.
76.
WrightB. E.ChristensenR. K.IsettK. R. (2013). Motivated to adapt? The role of public service motivation as employees face organizational change. Public Administration Review, 73, 738-747.
77.
WrightB. E.ChristensenR. K.PandeyS. K. (2013). Measuring Public Service Motivation: Exploring the Equivalence of Existing Global Measures. International Public Management Journal, 16(2), 197-223.
78.
WrightB. E.MoynihanD. P.PandeyS. K. (2012). Pulling the levers: Transformational leadership, public service motivation, and mission valence. Public Administration Review, 72, 206-215.
79.
YangK. (2005). Public administrators’ trust in citizens: A missing link in citizen involvement efforts. Public Administration Review, 65, 273-285.
80.
YangK. (2006). Trust and citizen involvement decisions: Trust in citizens, trust in institutions, and propensity to trust. Administration & Society, 38, 573-595.
81.
YangK.CallahanK. (2007). Citizen involvement efforts and bureaucratic responsiveness: Participatory values, stakeholder pressures, and administrative practicality. Public Administration Review, 67, 249-264.
82.
YangK.PandeyS. K. (2011). Further dissecting the black box of citizen participation: When does citizen involvement lead to good outcomes?Public Administration Review, 71, 880-892.
