Prior research indicates that public employees are more risk averse than private employees. Little is known, however, about the causes of such differences. This study tries to examine the effects of the “self-select mechanism” and asks the following question: Do workers choose their sectors based on their risk preferences? Using data from the National Longitudinal Survey, this study finds that higher levels of risk aversion are predictive of a greater propensity to pursue careers in the public sector. Findings indicate that an individual’s risk preference is the key to his or her career choices. Managerial implications and suggestions are discussed.
AhnT. (2010). Attitudes toward risk and self-employment of young workers. Labour Economics, 17, 434-442.
2.
AlburyD. (2005). Fostering innovation in public services. Public Money & Management, 25, 51-56.
3.
BarskyR. B.KimballM. S.JusterF. T.ShapiroM. D. (1997). Preference parameters and behavioral heterogeneity: An experimental approach in the health and retirement study. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112, 537-579.
4.
BattaglioR. P.Jr. (2010). Public service reform and motivation: Evidence from an employment at-will environment. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 30, 341-363.
5.
BattaglioR. P.Jr.CondreyS. E. (2009). Reforming public management: Analyzing the impact of public service reform on organizational and managerial trust. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 19, 689-707.
6.
BellanteD.LinkA. N. (1981). Are public sector workers more risk averse than private sector workers?Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 34, 408-412.
7.
BernsteinP. L. (1996). Against the Gods: The remarkable story of risk. New York, NY: John Wiley.
8.
BertelliA. M. (2006). Motivation crowding and the federal civil servant: Evidence from the US Internal Revenue Service. International Public Management Journal, 9, 3-23.
9.
BowmanJ. S.GertzM. G.GertzS. C.WilliamsR. L. (2003). Civil service reform in Florida state government: Employee attitudes one year later. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 23, 286-304.
10.
BoyneG. A. (2002). Public and private management: What’s the difference?Journal of Management Studies, 39, 97-122.
11.
BozemanB.KingsleyG. (1998). Risk culture in public and private organizations. Public Administration Review, 58, 109-118.
12.
BrachingerH. W.WeberM. (1997). Risk as a primitive: A survey of measures of perceived risk. Operations-Research-Spektrum, 19, 235-250.
13.
BuchananB. (1975). Red tape and the service ethic: Some unexpected differences between public and private managers. Administration & Society, 6, 423-438.
14.
BuelensM.Van den BroeckH. (2007). An analysis of differences in work motivation between public and private sector organizations. Public Administration Review, 67, 65-74.
CacioppeR.MockP. (1984). A comparison of the quality of work experience in government and private organizations. Human Relations, 37, 923-940.
17.
ChenC. A.BozemanB. (2012). Organizational risk aversion: Comparing the public and nonprofit sectors. Public Management Review, 14, 377-402.
18.
ChenC. A.HsiehC. W. (2014). Does pursuing external incentives compromise public service motivation? Comparing the effects of job security and high pay. Public Management Review. doi:10.1080/14719037.2014.895032
19.
ChiapporiP. A.PaiellaM. (2011). Relative risk aversion is constant: Evidence from panel data. Journal of the European Economic Association, 9, 1021-1052.
20.
ChoK. H.LeeS. H. (2001). Another look at public-private distinction and organizational commitment: A cultural explanation. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 9, 84-102.
21.
CoggburnJ. D. (2006). At-will employment in government: Insights from the State of Texas. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 26, 158-177.
22.
CrewsonP. E. (1997). Public-service motivation: Building empirical evidence of incidence and effect. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 7, 499-518.
23.
CrosonR.GneezyU. (2009). Gender differences in preferences. Journal of Economic Literature, 47, 448-474.
24.
DessG. G.LumpkinG. T. (2005). The role of entrepreneurial orientation in stimulating effective corporate entrepreneurship. The Academy of Management Executive, 19, 147-156.
25.
FarleyF.FarleyS. V. (1986). World of the type T personality. Psychology Today, 20(5), 44-52.
26.
FrankS. A.LewisG. B. (2004). Government employees working hard or hardly working?The American Review of Public Administration, 34, 36-51.
GneezyU.RustichiniA. (2000). Pay enough or don’t pay at all. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 115, 791-810.
29.
GoodmanD.FrenchP. E. (2011). Assessing the temporary use of at-will employment for reorganization and workforce reduction in Mississippi state government. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 31, 270-290.
30.
GoodsellC. T. (2003). The case for bureaucracy: A public administration polemic. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
31.
GovindarajanV.TrimbleC. (2012). Reverse innovation: Create far from home, win everywhere. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press.
32.
GrableJ. E.LyttonR. H. (1999). Financial risk tolerance revisited: The development of a risk assessment instrument. Financial Services Review, 8, 163-181.
33.
HariharanG.ChapmanK. S.DomianD. L. (2000). Risk tolerance and asset allocation for investors nearing retirement. Financial Services Review, 9, 159-170.
34.
JurkiewiczC. L.MasseyT. K.Jr.BrownR. G. (1998). Motivation in public and private organizations: A comparative study. Public Productivity & Management Review, 21, 230-250.
35.
KarlK. A.SuttonC. L. (1998). Job values in today’s workforce: A comparison of public and private sector employees. Public Personnel Management, 27, 515-527.
36.
KearneyC.HisrichR. D.RocheF. W. (2010). Change management through entrepreneurship in public sector enterprises. Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship, 15, 415-437.
37.
KelloughJ. E.NigroL. G. (2006). Dramatic reform in the public service: At-will employment and the creation of a new public workforce. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 16, 447-466.
38.
KhojastehM. (1993). Motivating the private vs. public sector managers. Public Personnel Management, 22, 391-401.
39.
KimJ.KelloughJ. E. (2014). At-will employment in the states: Examining the perceptions of agency personnel directors. Review of Public Personnel Administration. doi: 10.1177/0734371X13484154
40.
KimballM. S.SahmC. R.ShapiroM. D. (2008). Imputing risk tolerance from survey responses. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 103, 1028-1038.
41.
LewisG. B. (1990). In search of the Machiavellian milquetoasts: Comparing attitudes of bureaucrats and ordinary people. Public Administration Review, 50, 220-227.
42.
LewisG. B.FrankS. A. (2002). Who wants to work for the government?Public Administration Review, 62, 395-404.
43.
LyonsS. T.DuxburyL. E.HigginsC. A. (2006). A comparison of the values and commitment of private sector, public sector, and parapublic sector employees. Public Administration Review, 66, 605-618.
44.
MertonR. C. (1969). Lifetime portfolio selection under uncertainty: The continuous-time case. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 51, 247-257.
45.
MilwardH. B.RaineyH. G. (1983). Don’t blame the bureaucracy!Journal of Public Policy, 3, 149-168.
46.
NicholsonN.SoaneE.Fenton-O’CreevyM.WillmanP. (2005). Personality and domain-specific risk taking. Journal of Risk Research, 8, 157-176.
47.
PerryJ. L. (1997). Antecedents of public service motivation. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 7, 181-197.
48.
PerryJ. L.WiseL. R. (1990). The motivational bases of public service. Public Administration Review, 50, 367-373.
49.
RaineyH. G. (1982). Reward preferences among public and private managers: In search of the service ethic. The American Review of Public Administration, 16, 288-302.
50.
RogersE. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York, NY: The Free Press.
51.
RoszkowskiM. J. (1998). Risk tolerance in financial decisions. In CordellD. M. (Ed.), Readings in financial planning (pp. 281-328). Bryn Mawr, PA: The American College.
52.
StewartW. H.Jr.RothP. L. (2001). Risk propensity differences between entrepreneurs and managers: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 145-153.
53.
StoneK. V. (2007). Revisiting the at-will employment doctrine: Imposed terms, implied terms, and the normative world of the workplace. Industrial Law Journal, 36, 84-101.
54.
SundénA. E.SuretteB. J. (1998). Gender differences in the allocation of assets in retirement savings plans. The American Economic Review, 88, 207-211.
55.
TerryL. D. (1990). Leadership in the administrative state: The concept of administrative conservatorship. Administration & Society, 21, 395-412.
56.
TerryL. D. (1995). Leadership of public bureaucracies: The administrator as conservator. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
57.
Van WartM. (2003). Public-sector leadership theory: An assessment. Public Administration Review, 63, 214-228.
58.
WillS.PontellH. N.CheungR. (1998). Risky business revisited: White-collar crime and the orange county bankruptcy. Crime & Delinquency, 44, 367-387.
59.
WittmerD. (1991). Serving the people or serving for pay: Reward preferences among government, hybrid sector, and business managers. Public Productivity & Management Review, 14, 369-383.
60.
WoodardC. A. (2005). Merit by any other name: Reframing the civil service first principle. Public Administration Review, 65, 109-116.
