Research comparing public and private organizations has become more common, but questions remain as to whether differences in sector are significant or spurious. The research reported here, based on secondary data from a cross-national study of research units, examines differences in the performance of public and private sector units, controlling for a number of potentially confounding variables. Path analysis is used to `factor out "performance differences in public and private sector units. The findings suggest that sector context is not entirely a spurious function of such variables as size and technology, but itself makes a significant contribution to performance differences. It is further concluded that multiple criteria are important when seeking to measure R&D performance by sector. Public sector units appear advantaged with respect to certain activities and private sector ones with respect to others.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AHAROI, Y. , Z. MAIMON, and E. SEGEV (1978) "Performance and autonomy in organizations: determining dominant environmental components."Management Sci.24: 949-959.
2.
ALDRICH, H. (1979) Organizations and Environments. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
3.
ALESTATO, M. (1979) "Patterns of influence in research work: the problems of autonomy and democracy."R&D Management9 (Special Issue, The Management of Research Groups): 221-230.
4.
ANDREWS, F. M. [ed.](1979) Scientific Productivity: The Effectiveness of Research Groups in Six Countries. London: Cambridge Univ. Press.
5.
ARGYRIS, C. (1968) "On the effectiveness of research and development."Amer. Scientist56: 344-355.
6.
ARROW, K. J. (1962) Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention: On the Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity" (R. R. Nelson, ed.). Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press, for the National Bureau of Economic Research.
7.
AVENI, A. (1978) "Organizational linkages and resource mobilization: significance of linkage strength and breadth."Soc. Q.19: 185-202.
8.
AZME, M. and R. MANSFIELD (1981) "Market conditions, centralization, and organizational effectiveness: contingency theory reconsidered."Human Relations34: 157-168.
9.
BANKS, A. S. , CARLIP, V.DEWITT, P. R., and OVERSTREET, W. [eds.] (1981) Economic Handbook of the World. New York: McGraw-Hill.
10.
BENN, S.I. and GAUS, G. P. (1983) Public and Private in Social Life. New York: St. Martin's Press.
11.
BECKER, S. W. and N. BALOFF (1969) "Organizational structure and complex problem solving."Admin. Sci. Q.14: 260-271.
12.
BLISSET, M. (1972) Politics in Science. Boston: Little, Brown.
13.
BOSWORTH, D. L. (1978) "The rate of obsolescence of technical knowledge."J. of Industrial Economics26: 273-279.
14.
BOZEMAN, B. (1979) "Straight arrow science policy and its dangers."Public Administration Rev.39: 110-116.
15.
BOZEMAN, B. (1984) "Dimensions of `publicness' in organization theory," in B. Bozeman and J. Straussman (eds.), New Directions in Public Administration. Monterey, CA: Brooks-Cole.
16.
BOZEMAN, B. and D. KIM (1981) "Governing the `republic of science."'Polity14: 205-227.
17.
BOZEMAN, B. and A. N. LINK (1983) Investments in Technology: Corporate Strategies and Public Policy Alternatives. New York: Praeger.
18.
BOZEMAN, B. and J. STRAUSSMAN (1983) "Organization `publicness' and resource processes," in R. Hall and R. Quinn (eds.) Organization Theory and Public Policy. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
19.
BUCHANAN, B., II (1974) "Government managers, business executives, and organizational commitment."Public Administration Rev.34: 339-347.
20.
BUCHANAN, B., II (1975) "Red-tape and the service ethic: some unexpected differences between public and private managers."Administration and Society6: 423-444.
21.
BURNS, T. and G. M. STALKER (1961) The Management of Innovation. London: Tavistock Institute.
22.
CAMERON, K. S. (1981) "Domains of organizational effectiveness in colleges and universities."Academy of Management J.24: 25-47.
23.
CARNALL, C. A. (1982) "Semi-autonomous work groups and the social structure of the organization."J. of Management Studies19: 277-294.
24.
CHENG, J.L.C. (1979) "A study of coordination in three research settings."R&D Management9: 213-219.
25.
COTGROVE, S. and S. BOX (1970) Science, Industry and Society: Studies in the Sociology of Science. New York: Barnes & Noble.
26.
COULTER, P. B. (1979) "Organizational effectiveness in the public sector: the example of municipal fire protection."Admin. Sci. Q.24: 65-81.
27.
CROZIER, M. , HUNTINGTON, S. P., and WITANUKI, J. [eds.] (1975) Western Europe in the Crisis of Democracy. New York: New York University Press.
28.
DEMSETZ, H. (1969)"Information and efficiency."J. of Law and Economics1: 1-22.
29.
DUNCAN, R. B. (1973) "Multiple decision making structures in adapting to environmental uncertainty: the impact on organizational effectiveness."Human Relations26: 273-291.
30.
EHRMANN, H. W. (1971) "Interest groups and the bureaucracy in western democracies," pp 333-353 in M. DOGAN and R. ROSE (eds.) European Politics: A Reader. New York: John Wiley.
31.
EVAN, W. M. (1966) "Conflict and performance in R&D organizations: some preliminary finds," pp. 471-493 in M. C. Yovits, D. M. Gliford, R. H. Wilcox, E. Staneley, and H. D. Lerner (eds.) Research Program Effectiveness. New York: Gordon & Breach.
32.
FARRIS, G. F. (1929) "Organizational factors and individual performance: a longitudinal study."J. of Applied Psychology53: 87-92.
33.
FARRIS, G. F. (1969) "Some antecedents and consequences of scientific performance."IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, EM-16: 9-16.
34.
FENNO, R. F. (1966) The Power of the Purse: Appropriations Politics in Congress. Boston: Little, Brown.
35.
FOTTLER, M. D. (1981). "Management: is it really generic?"Academy of Management Rev.6: 1-12.
36.
GAWTHROP, L. C. (1971) Administrative Politics and Social Change. New York: St. Martin's.
37.
GHARRITY, N. J. (1965). "The use and non-use of patented inventions." Ph.D. dissertation, Johns Hopkins University.
38.
GLASER, E. M. and JOVANICH (1976) Productivity Gains through Worklife Improvements. New York: Harcourt Brace.
39.
HARRISON, F. (1974) "The management of scientists: determinants of perceived role performance."Academy of Management J.17: 234-241.
40.
HASSEL V. H. (1975) "Belgian civil servants and political decision making," pp. 187-195 in Dogan, M. (ed.) The Mandarins of Western Europe: The Political Role of Top Civil Servants. New York: John Wiley.
41.
HEISE, D. R. (1969) "Problems in path analysis and causal inference," in E. F. Borgatta (ed.) Sociological Methodology. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
42.
HEISLER, M. O. (1974a) "Institutionalizing societal cleavages in a cooptive polity: The growing importance of the output side in Belgium," pp. 178-220 in M. Heisler (ed.) Politics in Europe: Structures and Processes in Some Postindustrial Democracies. New York: David McKay Co.
43.
HEISLER, M. O. and R. B. KVAVIK (1974b) "Patterns of European politics: the `European Polity' Model," pp. 27-89 in M. Heisler (ed.) Politics in Europe: Structures and Processes in Some Postindustrial Democracies. New York: David McKay Co.
44.
HIRSCHLEIFER, J. (1971) "The private and social value of information and the reward to inventive activity."Amer. Econ. Rev.61: 561-574.
45.
HOOD, C. C. , A. DUNSIRE, and K. THOMSON (1981) Bureaumetrics: The Quantitative Comparison of British Central Government Agencies. University: Univ. of Alabama Press.
46.
HOFSTEDE, G. (1984) Culture's Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
47.
JACKSON, R. (1972) "Market structure and the rewards of patented inventions."Antitrust Bull.17: 911-926.
48.
JACOBS, D. (1974) "Dependency and vulnerability: an exchange approach to the control of organizations."Admin. Sci. Q.19: 45-59.
49.
KAUFMAN, H. (1981) The Administrative Behavior of Federal Bureau Chiefs. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.
50.
KELLER, R. T. , A. D. SZILAGYI, and W. E. HOLLAND (1977) "Job characteristics of research and development personnel: relationships with satisfaction and role variables."IEEE Transactions on Engineering ManagementEM-24: 7-12.
51.
KIMBERLY, J. R. (1979) "Issues in the creation of organizations: initiation, innovation, and institutionalization."Academy of Management J.22s: 437-457.
52.
KROHN, R. (1970) The Social Shaping of Science: Institutions, Ideology, and Careers in Science. Westport, CT: Greenwood.
53.
LAWLER, E. E., II , D. T. HALL, and G. R. OLDHAM (1974) "Organizational climate: relationship to organizational structure, process, and performance."Organizational Behavior and Human Performance11: 139-155.
54.
LYNN, L. E. (1981) Managing the Public's Business: The Job of the Government Executive. New York: Basic Books.
55.
MARCSON, S. (1972). "Research settings," pp. 161-191 in Z. Saadet al. (eds.) The Social Contexts of Research. London: John Wiley-Interscience.
56.
MARQUIS, D. G. and D. M. STRAIGHT (1966) "Organizational factors in project performance," pp. 441-458 in M. C. Yovitset al., (eds.) Research Progress Effectiveness. New York: Gordon & Breach.
57.
McMAHON, J. T. and G. W. PERRITT (1973) "Toward a contingency theory of organizational control."Academy of Management J.16: 624-635.
58.
MEYER, M. W. (1979) Change in Public Bureaucracies. London: Cambridge Univ. Press.
59.
MEYER, M. W. and Associates (1978) Environments and Organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
60.
MEYER, M. W. and R. O. WILLIAMS (1977) "Comparison of innovation in public and private sectors: an exploratory study."Washington, DC: National Science Foundation, Division of Policy Research and Analysis.
61.
MOHR, L. B. (1971) "Organizational technology and organizational structure."Admin. Sci. Q.16: 444-459.
62.
MOULIN, L. (1975) "The politicization of the administration of Belgium," pp 163-185 in M. Dogan (ed.) The Mandarins of Western Europe: The Political Role of Top Civil Servants. New York: John Wiley.
63.
NELSON, G. K. (1982) "A short ironic history of American national bureaucracy."J. of Politics44: 747-778.
64.
NIE, N. H. , C. HULL, C. HADLAI, J. F. JENKINS, K. STEINBRENNER, and D. H. BENT (1975) SPSS: Statistical Package for the Social Sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill.
65.
NOUSIAINEN, J. (1971) The Finnish Political System. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
66.
OECD [Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development] (1971) Review of National Science Policy: Austria. Paris: Author.
67.
OECD (1973) The Research System, Volume 2: Belgium, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland. Paris: Author.
68.
OECD (1975) Patterns of Resources Devoted to Research and Experimental Development in the OECD Area, 1963-1971. Paris: Author.
69.
OECD (1978) Policies for the Stimulation of Industrial Innovation: Country Reports, Vol. 11-2: Australia, Austria, Denmark, Finland, Ireland, Netherlands, Spain, Sweden. Paris: Author.
70.
OSBORN, R. N. and J. G. HUNT (1974) "Environment and organizational effectiveness."Admin. Sci. Q.19: 231-246.
71.
PELZ, D. C. and F. M. ANDREWS (1966a) "Autonomy, coordination and stimulation in relation to scientific achievement."Behavioral Sci.11: 89-97.
72.
PELZ, D. C. and F. M. ANDREWS (1966b) Scientists in Organizations: Productive Climates for Research and Development. New York: John Wiley.
73.
PENNINGS, J. M. (1976) "Dimensions of organizational influence and their effectiveness correlates."Admin. Sci. Q.21: 688-699.
74.
PERROW, C. (1972) Complex Organizations: A Critical Survey. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.
75.
PETERS, B. G. (1978) The Politics of Bureaucracy: A Comparative Perspective. New York:Logan.
76.
PFEFFER, J. and A. LEONG (1977) "Resource allocations in United-fund: an examination of power and independence,"Social Forces55: 775-790.
77.
PFEFFER, J. and G. R. SALANCIK (1978) The External Control of Organizations. New York: Harper & Row.
78.
PROVAN, K. G. , J. M. BEYER, and C. KRYTBOTSH (1980) "Environmental linkages and power in resource dependence relations between organizations."Admin. Sci. Q.25: 200-225.
79.
PROVAN K. G. (1982) "Interorganizational linkages and influence over decision-making."Academy of Management J.25: 443-451
80.
RAINEY, H. G. (1979) "Perceptions of incentives in business and government: implications for civil service reform."Public Administration Rev.38: 41-45.
81.
RAINEY, H. G. (1983) "Public agencies and private firms, incentives structures, goals, and individual roles."Administration and Society13.
82.
RAINEY, H. G. , R. W. BACKOFF, and C. H. LEVINE (1976) "Comparing public and private organizations."Public Administration Rev.36: 233-244.
83.
RAINEY, H .G. , J. L. PERRY, and B. BOZEMAN (1982) "Empirical comparisons of public and private organizations: conceptual and methodological issues." Presented at the National Conference of the American Society of Public Administration.
84.
REIMANN, B. C. (1974) "Dimensions of structure in effective organizations: some empirical evidence."Academy of Management Sci.17: 693-708.
85.
RESKIN, B. F. (1977) "Scientific productivity and the reward structure of science."Amer. Soc. Rev.42: 491-504.
86.
RIDLEY, F. F. (1981) "The responsibility of officials in the democratic political system." pp 19-52 in A. F. LEEMANS and A. DUNSIRE (eds.) The Public's Servants: Checks on Public Servants in European Countries. Finland: Finn-publishers.
87.
SCHULER, R. S. (1977) "Role perceptions, satisfactions and performance moderated by organization level and participation in decision making."Academy of Management J.20: 159-165.
88.
SCHUMPETER, J. A. (1961) Theory of Economic Development. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.
89.
SCHUMPETER, J. A. (1964) Business Cycles. New York: McGraw-Hill.
90.
SCHUMPETER, J. A. (1975) Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy. New York: Harper & Row.
91.
SEGAL, M. (1974) "Organization and environment: a typology of adaptability and structure."Public Administration Rev.34: 212-220.
92.
SIMONETTI, J. L. and F. G. BOSEMAN (1975) "The impact of market competition on organization structure and effectiveness: a cross-cultural study."Academy of Management J.18: 631-638.
93.
STEPHENSON, R. W. , B. S. GANTZ, and C. E. ERICKSON (1971) "Development of organizational climate inventories for use in R&D organizations."IEEE Transactions on Engineering ManagementEM-18: 38-50.
94.
STIEFBOLD, R. P. (1974) "Segmented Pluralism and Consociational Democracy in Austria: Problems of Political Stability and Change," pp. 117-177 in M. Heisler (ed.) Politics in Europe. New York: David McKay.
95.
SUSMAN, G. (1976) Autonomy at Work: A Sociotechnical Analysis of Participative Management. New York: Praeger.
96.
SUTTON, R. I. and D. M. ROUSSEAU (1979) "Structure, technology, and dependence on a parent organization: organizational and environmental correlates of individual responses."J. of Applied Psychology64: 675-687.
97.
TANNENBAUM, A. E. , KAVIC, B., ROSNER, M., VIANELLO, M., and WEISER, G. (1974) Hierarchy in Organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
98.
THOMAS, H. C. (1981)"Ideological trends in western political parties," pp 348-366 in P. Merkl (ed.) Western European Party Systems: Trends and Prospects. New York: Free Press.
99.
TRIST, E. L. , G. I. SUSMAN, and G. R. BROWN (1977) "An experiment in autonomous working in an American underground coal-mine."Human Relations30: 201-236.
100.
UNESCO (1979) National Science and Technology Policies in Europe and North America, 1978: Present Situation and Future Prospects. Paris: Author.
101.
U.S. Office of Personnel Management (1979) Federal Employee Attitudes. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
102.
WALD, S. (1973) "Industry, Science, University,"pp 115-158 in OECD The Research System: A Comparative Survey of the Organization and Financing of Fundamental Research, Vol. II: Belgium, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland. Paris: Author.
103.
WALMSLEY, G. L. and M. N. ZALD (1973) The Political Economy of Public Organizations. Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath.
104.
WARWICK, D. P. (1975) A Theory of Public Bureaucracy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press.
105.
WEINER, C. (1981) "The position of civil servant in relation to their hierarchical superiors," pp. 71-98 in A. F. Leemans and A. Dunsire (eds.) The Public's Servants: Checks on Public Servants in European Countries. Finland: Finn-publishers. publishers.
106.
WHETTEN, D. A. and T. K. LEONG (1979) "Instrumental value of interorganizational relations: antecedents and consequences of linkage formation."Academy Management J.22: 325-344.
