I argue that organization theory and public policy studies, two field that share many common origins, have had surprisingly little cross-fertilization and that this state of affairs is both injurious and correctable. This paper (1) considers the costs and the foregone opportunities resulting from this mutual intellectual disregard, (2) presents an illustrative case to show the possibility of cross-fertilizing public policy and organization studies, and (3) suggests some general strategies to promote cross-fertilization between these two apparently related fields of inquiry. I provide a detailed illustration of the cross-fertilization of public policy and organization studies by recounting the history of “dimensional publicness theory,” a theory lens that, uncommonly, has been employed by both organization theorists and public policy scholars. I conclude with suggestions for promoting cross-fertilization between public policy studies and organization theory.
AndersonS. (2012). Public, private, neither, both? Publicness theory and the analysis of healthcare organisations. Social Science & Medicine, 74, 313–322.
2.
AndrewsR.BoyneG.WalkerR. M. (2011). Dimensions of publicness and organizational performance: A review of the evidence. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21, i301–i319.
3.
AntonsenM.JørgensenT. (1997). The publicness of public organizations. Public Administration, 75, 337–357.
4.
Arellano-GaultD. (2011). Transparency reforms in the public sector: Beyond the new economics of organization. Organization Studies, 32, 1029–1050.
5.
AustinD. M. (1983). The Flexner myth and the history of social work. Social Service Review, 57, 357–377.
6.
BardachE. (1977). The implementation game. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
7.
BarnesB.BloorD.HenryJ. (1996). Scientific knowledge: a sociological analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
8.
BarrettS. M. (2004). Implementation studies: Time for a revival? Personal reflections on 20 years of implementation studies. Public Administration, 82, 249–262.
9.
BauerR. A.PoolI. D. S.DexterL. A. (1972). American business and public policy: the politics of foreign trade. Chicago: Aldine Publishing.
10.
BecherT.TrowlerP. R. (2001). Academic tribes and territories: intellectual enquiry and the culture of disciplines, second edition. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
11.
BettencourtL.KaiserD.KaurJ.Castillo-ChavezC.WojickD. (2008). Population modeling of the emergence and development of scientific fields. Scientometrics, 75, 495–518.
12.
BlairJ. D.HuntJ. G. (1986). Getting inside the head of the management researcher one more time: Context-free and context-specific orientations in research. Journal of Management, 12, 147–166.
13.
BoardmanC.GrayD. (2010). The new science and engineering management: Cooperative research centers as government policies, industry strategies, and organizations. Journal of Technology Transfer, 35, 445–459.
14.
BobrowD.DryzekJ. (1987). Policy analysis by design. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.
15.
BoschkenH. L. (1992). Analyzing performance skewness in public agencies: The case of urban mass transit. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 2, 265–288.
16.
BoxerM. J. (1982). For and about women: The theory and practice of women’s studies in the United States. Feminist Theory, 7, 661–695.
17.
BoyneG. A. (2002). Public and private management: What’s the difference?Journal of Management Studies, 39, 97–122.
18.
BozemanB. (1984). Dimensions of publicness: An approach to public organization theory. In BozemanB.StraussmanJ. (Eds.), New Directions in Public Administration (pp. 46–62). Belmont, CA: Crooks/Cole.
19.
BozemanB. (1987). All organizations are public: bridging public and private organizational theories. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
20.
BozemanB. (2002). Public-value failure: When efficient markets may not do. Public Administration Review, 62, 145–161.
21.
BozemanB.BoardmanC. (2003). Managing the new multipurpose, multidiscipline university research center: institutional innovation in the academic community. Washington, DC: IBM Endowment for the Business of Government.
22.
BozemanB.BoardmanC. (2004). The NSF Engineering Research Centers and the university-industry research revolution. Journal of Technology Transfer, 29, 365–375.
23.
BozemanB.BoardmanC. (2013). Academic faculty in university research centers: Neither capitalism’s slaves nor teaching fugitives. Journal of Higher Education, 84, 88–120.
24.
BozemanB.LaredoP.MangematinV. (2007). Understanding the emergence and deployment of “nano” science and technology. Research Policy, 36, 807–812.
25.
BozemanB.MoultonS. (2011). Integrated publicness: A framework for public management strategy and performance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21, i363–i380.
26.
BozemanB.RogersJ.R. (2001). Strategic management of government-sponsored R&D portfolios: Lessons from office of basic energy sciences projects. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 19, 413–442.
27.
BozemanB.SarewitzD. (2005). Public failure in science policy. Science and Public Policy, 32, 119–136.
28.
BozemanB.StraussmanJ. (1990). Public management strategies: guidelines for managerial effectiveness. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
29.
BraybrookeD.LindblomC. (1963). A Strategy of Decision: Policy Evaluation as a Social Process. New York: Free Press.
30.
BretschneiderS. (1990). Management information systems in public and private organizations: An empirical test. Public Administration Review, 50, 536–545.
31.
BrewerG. A.BrewerG. A.Jr. (2011). Parsing public/private differences in work motivation and performance: An experimental study. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21(suppl 3), i347–i362.
32.
BusenbergG. J. (2001). Learning in organizations and public policy. Journal of Public Policy, 21, 173–190.
33.
CappelliP.ShererP. D. (1991). The missing role of context in OB: The need for a meso-level approach. Research in Organizational Behavior, 13, 55–110.
34.
ChenC.ChenY.HorowitzM.HouHLiuZ.PellegrinoD. (2009). Towards an explanatory and computational theory of scientific discovery. Journal of Informetrics, 3, 191–209.
35.
CollinsH. M.EvansR. (2002). The third wave of science studies: Studies of expertise and experience. Social Studies of Science, 32, 235–296.
36.
CorleyE.BoardmanC.BozemanB. (2006). Design and the management of multi-institutional research collaborations. Research Policy, 35, 975–993.
37.
CrowM.BozemanB. (1987). R&D laboratory classification and public policy: The effects of environmental context on laboratory behavior. Research Policy, 16, 229–258.
38.
CrowM.BozemanB. (1991). R&D laboratories in the USA: Structure, capacity and context. Science and Public Policy, 18, 165–179.
39.
CrowM.BozemanB. (1998). Limited by design: R&D laboratories in the US national innovation system. New York: Columbia University Press.
40.
DahlR. A.LindblomC. E. (1953). Politics, economics, and welfare: planning and politico-economic systems resolved into basic processes. New York: Harper.
41.
DeLeonP.DeLeonL. (2002). Whatever happened to policy implementation? An alternative approach. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 12, 467–488.
42.
DemortainD. (2004). Public organizations, stakeholders and the construction of publicness: Claims and defence of authority in public action. Public Administration, 82, 975–992.
43.
DixitA. (2009). Governance institutions and economic activity. American Economic Review, 99, 3–24.
44.
DunnW. N. (2003). Public policy analysis: an introduction, third edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
45.
DunningJ. H. (2002). Perspectives on international business research: A professional autobiography: Fifty years researching and teaching international business. Journal of International Business Studies, 33, 817–835.
46.
DuttaD.HeiningerM. (1999). Complementarity of market and state intervention in the context of Australia’s structural reforms since the early 1980s. International Journal of Social Economics, 26, 955–964.
47.
EllwoodJ. W. (2008). Challenges to public policy and public management education. Journal of Public Policy Analysis and Management, 27, 172–187.
48.
ElmoreR. F. (1979–1980). Backward mapping: Implementation research and policy decisions. Political Science Quarterly, 94, 601–616.
49.
EmmertM. A.CrowM. M. (1988). Public, private and hybrid organizations: An empirical examination of the role of publicness. Administration & Society, 20, 216–244.
50.
EnglebertE. A. (1977). University education for public policy analysis. Public Administration Review, 37, 228–236.
FarrJ. (1988). The history of political science. American Journal of Political Science, 32, 1175–1195.
53.
FullerS. (1991). Disciplinary boundaries and the rhetoric of the social sciences. Poetics Today, 12, 301–325.
54.
FurubotnE.RichterR. (2005). Institutions and economic theory: the contribution of the new institutional economics, 2nd edition.Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
55.
GierynT. F. (1983). Boundary-work and the demarcation of science from non-science: Strains and interests in professional interests of scientists. American Sociological Review, 48, 781–795.
56.
GierynT. F. (1999). Cultural boundaries of science: credibility on the line. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
57.
GoldsteinS. M.NaorM. (2005). Linking publicness to operations management practices: A study of quality management practices in hospitals. Journal of Operations Management, 23, 209–228.
58.
GrahamL.LepeniesW.WeingartP. (1983) Functions and uses of disciplinary histories. Dordrecht: Reidel.
59.
GreyC. (2002). What are business schools for? On silence and voice in management education. Journal of Management Education, 26, 496–511.
60.
GustonD. H. (2001). Boundary organizations in environmental policy and science. Science, Technology and Human Values, 26, 399–408.
61.
HallR. H.QuinnR. E. (Eds.) (1983). Organization theory and public policy. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE Publications.
62.
HaqueS. (2001). The diminishing publicness of public service under the current mode of governance. Public Administration Review, 61, 65–82.
63.
HeinrichC. J. (2000). Organizational form and performance: An empirical investigation of nonprofit and for-profit job-training service providers. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 19, 233–261.
64.
HeinrichC.FournierE. (2004). Dimensions of publicness and performance in substance abuse treatment organizations. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management23: 49–70.
65.
HuangK.ProvanK. G. (2007). Resource tangibility and patterns of interaction in a publicly funded health and human services network. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 17, 435–454.
66.
IsettK. R.ProvanK. G. (2005). The evolution of dyadic interorganizational relationships in a network of publicly funded nonprofit agencies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15, 149–165.
67.
JenningsP. H. (1996). The effect of publicness on the energy technology decision process. Journal of Technology Transfer, 21, 27–33.
68.
JohnsG. (2006). The essential impact of context on organizational behavior. Academy of Management Review, 31, 386–408.
69.
JørgensenT.BozemanB. (2002) Public values lost? Comparing cases on contracting out from Denmark and the United States. Public Management Review, 4, 64–81.
70.
KaufmanB. E. (1993) The origins and evolution of industrial relations in the United States. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
71.
LasswellH. D. (1971). A pre-view of the policy sciences. New York: Elsevier.
72.
LernerD.LasswellH. D. (Eds.) (1968). The policy sciences. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
73.
LesterJ. P.BowmanA. O. M.GogginM. L.O’TooleL. J. (2005). Public policy implementation: Evolution of the field and agenda for future research. Review of Policy Research, 7, 200–216.
74.
LeydesdorffL. (2007). Betweenness centrality as an indicator of the interdisciplinarity of scientific journals. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58, 1303–1319.
75.
LidenR. C.AntonakisJ. (2009). Considering context in psychological leadership research. Human Relations, 62, 1587–1605.
76.
LindblomC. E. (1977). Politics and markets. New York: Basic Books.
77.
LinkA. N.LinkJ. (2009). Government as entrepreneur. New York: Oxford University Press.
78.
LowiT. J. (1964). American business, public policy, case-studies, and political theory. World Politics, 16, 677–715.
79.
LynchW. T.KlineR. (2000) Engineering practice and engineering ethics. Science, Technology and Human Value, 25, 195–225.
80.
MatthiassonJ. S. (1968). My discipline is better than your discipline: Some barriers to interdisciplinary research. Canadian Review of Sociology, 5, 263–275.
81.
McCoolD. (1995). Public policy theories, models, and concepts: an anthology (Vol. 1). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
82.
MertonR. K. (Ed.) (1973). The sociology of science: the theoretical and empirical investigations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
83.
Messer-DavidowE.ShumwayD. R. (Eds.) (1993). Knowledges: historical and critical studies in disciplinarity. Charlottesville, VA: University of Virginia Press.
84.
MillerT. R.BairdT. D.LittlefieldC. M.KofinasG.ChapinF.RedmanC. L. (2008). Epistemological pluralism: Reorganizing interdisciplinary research. Ecology and Society, 13, 46–61.
85.
MotohashiK. (2005). University–industry collaborations in Japan: The role of new technology-based firms in transforming the National Innovation System. Research Policy, 34, 583–594.
86.
MoultonS. (2009) Putting together the publicness puzzle: A framework for realized publicness. Public Administration Review, 69, 889–900.
87.
MuellerD. C. (2008) Public choice: An introduction. In RowleyC. K.SchneiderF. G.MuellerD. C. (Eds.), Readings in public choice and constitutional political economy (pp. 31–46). New York: Springer.
88.
NavarroP. (2008). The MBA core curricula of top-ranked US business schools: A study in failure?Academy of Management Learning and Education, 7, 108–123.
89.
NewberryB. (2004) The dilemma of ethics in engineering education. Science and Engineering Ethics, 10, 343–355.
NuttP. C.BackoffR. W. (1993). Organizational publicness and its implications for strategic management. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 3, 209–231.
92.
O’TooleL. J. (2004). The theory–practice issue in policy implementation research. Public Administration, 82, 309–329.
93.
Owen-SmithJ.RiccaboniM.PammolliF.PowellW. W. (2002). A comparison of US and European university–industry relations in the life sciences. Management Science, 48, 24–43.
94.
PeschU. (2008). The publicness of public administration. Administration and Society, 40, 170–193.
95.
PfefferJ. (1993). Barriers to the advance of organizational science: Paradigm development as a dependent variable. Academy of Management Review, 18, 599–620.
96.
PfefferJ.FongC. T. (2002). The end of business schools? Less success than meets the eye. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 1, 78–95.
97.
PorterA. L.RafolsI. (2009). Is science becoming more interdisciplinary? Measuring and mapping six research fields over time. Scientometrics, 81, 719–745.
98.
PorterT. M. (2009). How science became technical. Isis, 100, 292–309.
99.
PressmanJ. L.WildavskyA. (1973). Implementation: How great expectations in Washington are dashed in Oakland; or, why it’s amazing that federal programs work at all. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
100.
PriceJ. L. (1958). Continuity in social research: TVA and the grass roots. Pacific Sociological Review, 1/2, 63–68.
101.
ProvanK. G.IsettK. R.MilwardH. B. (2004). Cooperation and compromise: A network response to conflicting institutional pressures in community mental health. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 33, 489–514.
102.
RaineyH.BackoffR. W.LevineC. H. (1976). Comparing public and private organizations. Public Administration Review, 36, 233–246.
103.
RavetzJ. (1971). Scientific knowledge and its social problems. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
104.
ReichS. M.ReichJ. A. (2006). Cultural competence in interdisciplinary collaborations: A method for respecting diversity in research partnerships. American Journal of Community Psychology, 38, 51–62.
105.
RocheleauB.WuL. (2002). Public versus private information systems, do they differ in important ways? A review and empirical test. American Review of Public Administration, 32, 379–397.
106.
RodrikD.ZeckhauserR. (2007). The dilemma of government responsiveness. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 7, 601–620.
SabatierP. (1986). Top-down and bottom-up approaches to implementation research: A critical analysis and suggested synthesis. Journal of Public Policy, 6, 21–48.
109.
SabatierP. A. (1988). An advocacy coalition framework of policy change and the role of policy-oriented learning therein. Policy Sciences, 21, 129–168.
110.
SaetrenH. (2005). Facts and myths about public policy implementation: Out-of-fashion, old fashioned, allegedly dead, but still very alive and relevant. Policy Studies Journal, 33, 559–582.
111.
Sanz-MenendezL.Cruz-CastroL. (2003). Coping with environmental pressures: Public research organisations’ responses to funding crises. Research Policy, 32, 1293–1308.
112.
SchultzD.SchultzS. (2004). A history of modern psychology, 8th edition.Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thompson Learning.
113.
SegalL.LehrerM. (2012).The institutionalization of stewardship: Theory, propositions, and insights from change in the Edmonton public schools. Organization Studies, 33, 169–201.
114.
SelznickP. (1949). TVA and the grass roots: a study in the sociology of formal organization. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
115.
SimonH. A. (1995). Organizations and markets. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 5, 273–294.
116.
SimonH. A. (1998). Why public administration?Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 8, 1–11.
117.
Small AlbionW. (1895). Private business Is a public trust. American Journal of Sociology, 1, 276–289.
118.
SmithT. B. (1973). The policy implementation process. Policy Sciences, 4, 197–209.
119.
SteenhuisenB.van EetenM. (2008). Invisible trade-offs of public values: Inside Dutch Railways. Public Money and Management, 28, 147–152.
120.
StiglerG. J. (1992). Law or economics?Journal of Law and Economics, 35, 455–471.
121.
StokerR. P. (1991). Reluctant partners, implementing federal policy. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.
122.
ThoenigJ. C. (1997). Public sector organizations. In SorgeA.WarnerM. (Eds.), Handbook of organizational behavior (pp. 421–432). London: Thomson Business Press.
123.
VinckD. (2010). The enterprise of science: Construction and reconstruction of social capital around nano R&D. International Journal of Nanotechnology, 7, 121–136.
124.
WalkerR. M.BozemanB. (2011). Editors’ introduction: Publicness and organizational performance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21, i279–i281.
125.
WamsleyG. L.ZaldM. (1973). The political economy of public organizations. Lexington, MA: D.C. Health.
126.
WheelerG. F.BradyF. N. (1998). Do public-sector and private-sector personnel have different ethical dispositions? A study of two sites. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 8, 93–115.
127.
WhitleyR. (1984). The intellectual and social organization of the sciences. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
128.
WildavskyA. (1979). Speaking truth to power: the art and craft of policy analysis. Boston, MA: Little, Brown & Company.
129.
WilsonW. (1887). The study of administration. Political Science Quarterly, 2, 197–222.
130.
WinterS. C. (2003). Implementation perspectives. In PetersB. GPierreJ. (Eds.), Handbook of public administration (pp. 212–222). SAGE Publications.
131.
WittmerD.CourseyD. (1996). Ethical work climates: Comparing top managers in public and private organizations. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 6, 559–572.
