The literature on representative bureaucracy posits that increased representation at the managerial level leads to improved outcomes for minority clients. These managers, however, must work within organizational constraints and during times of environmental turbulence to sustain organizational performance. We forward the theory that contextual factors, such as environmental turbulence, could moderate the effects of representation on organizational performance. Utilizing a Texas school-level dataset of K-12 education from 2011, we examine how the race of the school principal influences student standardized test performance in a time of widespread financial resource cuts. Our findings suggest that same-race school principal representation improves the academic performance of both African American and Latino students, but the positive effects diminish as budgetary cuts become more widespread in the school. This means that environmental turbulence can decrease the impact of representation.
AnS.SongM.MeierK. J. (2021). Representative bureaucracy and the policy environment: Gender representation in forty-four countries. Public Administration, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12789
2.
AndersenS. C.MortensenP. B. (2010). Policy stability and organizational performance: Is there a relationship?Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 20(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mup005
3.
AndrewsR.JohansenM. (2012). Organizational environments and performance: A linear or nonlinear relationship?Public Organization Review, 12(2), 175–189. https://doi:10.1007/s11115-012-0173-z
4.
AnsellC.TrondalJ. (2018). Governing turbulence: An organizational–institutional agenda. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance, 1(1), 43–57. https://doi.org/10.1093/ppmgov/gvx013
5.
BehnR. D. (1978). Closing a government facility. Public Administration Review, 38(4), 332. https://doi.org/10.2307/975815
6.
BoyneG.PowellM.AshworthR. (2001). Spatial equity and public services: An empirical analysis of local government finance in England. Public Management Review, 3(1), 19–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719030122423
7.
BoyneG. A. (2003). Sources of public service improvement: A critical review and research agenda. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 13(3), 367–394. https://10.1093/jopart/mug027
8.
BoyneG. A.MeierK. J. (2009). Environmental turbulence, organizational stability, and public service performance. Administration & Society, 40(8), 799–824. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399708326333
9.
BozemanB. (2010). Hard lessons from hard times: Reconsidering and reorienting the ‘managing decline’ literature. Public Administration Review, 70(4), 557–563. https://10.1111/j.1540-6210.2010.02176.x
10.
CameronK. S.KimM. U.WhettenD. A. (1987). Organizational effects of decline and turbulence. Administrative Science Quarterly, 32(2), 222. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393127
11.
CapersK. J.CandisW. S. (2021). Race, ethnicity, and immigration: Assessing the link between passive and active representation for foreign-born clients. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 31(4), 704–722. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muab009
12.
CarrollK. (2017). Ambition is priceless: Socialization, ambition, and representative bureaucracy. The American Review of Public Administration, 47(2), 209–229. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074016671602
13.
CarrollK. (2019). Mo’ money, no problem: The impact of financial shocks on representation. Public Performance & Management Review, 42(3), 505–528. https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2018.1474771
14.
CarrollK.WrightK.MeierK. J. (2019). Minority public administrators: Managing organizational demands while acting as an advocate. The American Review of Public Administration, 49(7), 810–824. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074019859942
15.
CepikuD.MastrodascioM. (2021). Equity in public services: A systematic literature review. Public Administration Review, 81(6), 1019–1032. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13402
16.
DornE.HancockB.SarakatsannisJ.VirulegE. (2020). COVID-19 and learning loss—disparities grow and students need help. https://wasa-oly.org/WASA/images/WASA/5.0%20Professional%20Development/4.2%20Conference%20Resources/Winter/2021/covid-19-and-learning-loss-disparities-grow-and-students-need-help-v3.pdf
17.
DownsA, and RAND Corporation (1967). Inside bureaucracy. Little, Brown.
18.
EppC.Maynard-MoodyS.Haider-MarkelD. (2014). Pulled over: How police stops define race and citizenship. University of Chicago Press.
19.
FaveroN.MolinaA. L. (2018). Is active representation an organizational-level process? The indirect effect of bureaucrats on clients they don’t directly serve. The American Review of Public Administration, 48(1), 3–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074016660614
20.
FlinkC.ChenC. (2021). Management capacity, financial resources, and organizational performance: Evidence from state transportation agencies. Public Performance & Management Review, 44(6), 1341–1366. https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2021.1933108
21.
FlinkC.MolinaA. L. (2020). Improving the performance of public organizations: Financial resources and the conditioning effect of clientele context. Public Administration, 99(2), 387–404. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12690
22.
FlinkC. M. (2018). Ordering chaos: The performance consequences of budgetary changes. American Review of Public Administration, 48(4), 291–300. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074016687072
23.
GlassbergA. (1978). Organizational responses to municipal budget decreases. Public Administration Review, 38(4), 325. https://doi.org/10.2307/975814
24.
GrissomJ. A.RodriguezL. A.KernE. C. (2017). Teacher and principal diversity and the representation of students of color in gifted programs: Evidence from national data. The Elementary School Journal, 117(3), 396–422. https://doi.org/10.1086/690274
25.
GroeneveldS.AndrewsR.MeierK. J.SchröterE. (2015). Representative bureaucracy and public service performance: where, why and how does representativeness work?SSRN Electronic Journal. https://www.ssrn.com/abstract=3982606(accessed June 23, 2022).
26.
HawesD. P. (2022). Representative bureaucracy, institutional support, and clientele need: The case of undocumented students. Administration & Society, 54(8), 1465–1492. https://doi.org/10.1177/00953997211063155
27.
HawesD. P. (2021b). Symbolic representation, cooperation, and undocumented immigrants: The role of representation in improving assessments of cooperative behaviors in education. The American Review of Public Administration, 51(8), 605–618. https://doi.org/10.1177/02750740211031928
28.
HerdP.MoynihanD. (2019). Administrative burden: Policymaking by other means. Russel Sage Foundation.
29.
JuenkeG. E. (2005). Management tenure and network time: How experience affects bureaucratic dynamics. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15(1), 113–131. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mui006
30.
KeiserL. R.WilkinsV. M.MeierK. J.HollandC. A. (2002). Lipstick and logarithms: Gender, institutional context, and representative bureaucracy. American Political Science Review, 96(3), 553–564. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055402000321
31.
KieferT.HartleyJ.ConwayN.BrinerR. B. (2015). Feeling the squeeze: Public employees’ experiences of cutback- and innovation-related organizational changes following a national announcement of budget reductions. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25(4), 1279–1305. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muu042
32.
KingsleyJ. D. (1944). Representative bureaucracy. Antioch Press.
33.
KiokoS. N.MarloweJ.MatkinD. S. T.MoodyM.SmithD. L.ZhaoZ. J. (2011). Why public financial management matters. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21(Supplement 1), i113–i124. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muq060
34.
LeachmanM.MastersonK.FigueroaE. (2017). “A punishing decade for school funding.” 17.
35.
LeeS.-Y.WhitfordA. B. (2013). Assessing the effects of organizational resources on public agency performance: Evidence from the US federal government. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 23(3), 687–712. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mus050
36.
LevineC. H. (1979). More on cutback management: Hard questions for hard times. Public Administration Review, 39(2), 179. https://doi.org/10.2307/3110475
37.
LewisG. B. (1988). The consequences of fiscal stress: Cutback management and municipal employment. State And Local Government Review, 20(2), 64–71. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4354931
38.
LynnL. E.HeinrichC. J.HillC. J. (2000). Studying governance and public management: Challenges and prospects. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10(2), 233–262. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a024269
39.
Maynard-MoodyS.MushenoM. (2022). Cops, teachers, counselors: Stories from the front lines of public service (2nd ed.). University of Michigan Press.
40.
McCreaA. M. (2021). The cost of representation: Insurance status, gender, and cardiac outcomes in emergency department care. Public Administration Review, 81(6), 1092–1101. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13354
MeierK. J. (2019). Theoretical frontiers in representative bureaucracy: New directions for research. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance, 2(1), 39–56. https://doi.org/10.1093/ppmgov/gvy004
43.
MeierK. J.HicklinA. (2007). Employee turnover and organizational performance: Testing a hypothesis from classical public administration. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(4), 573–590. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mum028
44.
MeierK. J.Nicholson-CrottyJ. (2006). Gender, representative bureaucracy, and law enforcement: The case of sexual assault. Public Administration Review, 66(6), 850–860. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00653.x
45.
MeierK. J.O’TooleL. J. (2009). The dog that didn’t bark: How public managers handle environmental shocks. Public Administration, 87(3), 485–502. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2009.01773.x
46.
MeierK. J.RutherfordA. (2016). The politics of African-American education: Representation, partisanship, and education equity. Cambridge University Press.
47.
MosherF. C. (1968). Democracy and the public service. Oxford University Press.
48.
National Association of State Budget Officers (2013). State budgeting and lessons learned from the economic downturn: Analysis and commentary from state budget officers. https://www.nasbo.org/reports-data/lessons-learned-from-the-economic-downturn
O’TooleL. J.MeierK. J. (1999). Modeling the impact of public management: Implications of structural context. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 9(4), 505–526. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a024421
51.
O’TooleL. J.MeierK. J. (2003). Plus Ça change: Public management, personnel stability, and organizational performance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 13(1), 43–64. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3525616
52.
O’TooleL. J.MeierK. J. (2015). Public management, context, and performance: In quest of a more general theory. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25(1), 237–256. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muu011
53.
ParkS. (2013). Does gender matter? The effect of gender representation of public bureaucracy on governmental performance. The American Review of Public Administration, 43(2), 221–242. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074012439933
54.
ParkS. (. (2020). Representative bureaucracy through staff with lived experience: Peer coproduction in the field of substance use disorder treatment. The American Review of Public Administration, 50(8), 880–897. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074020930414
55.
PashaO.PoisterT. H. (2017). Exploring the change in strategy formulation and performance measurement practices under turbulence. Public Performance & Management Review, 40(3), 504–528. https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2016.1276843
56.
PfefferJ.SalancikG. (2003). The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. Stanford University Press.
57.
RiccucciN. M.Van RyzinG. G. (2017). Representative bureaucracy: A lever to enhance social equity, coproduction, and democracy: Theory to practice. Public Administration Review, 77(1), 21–30. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12649
58.
SanchezC. (2011). “Texas schools grapple with big budget cuts.” 1.
59.
ScottW. R.DavisG. F. (2015). Organizations and organizing: Rational, natural and open systems perspectives. Routledge.
60.
SeldonS.1997. The promise of representative bureaucracy: Diversity and responsiveness in a government agency. ME Sharp.
61.
SongM. (2018). Gender representation and student performance: Representative bureaucracy goes to Korea. The American Review of Public Administration, 48(4), 346–358. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074016676888
62.
SowaJ. E.SeldenS. C. (2003). Administrative discretion and active representation: An expansion of the theory of representative bureaucracy. Public Administration Review, 63(6), 700–710. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-6210.00333
63.
The Texas School Coalition (2021). The past decade in Texas school finance. https://www.txsc.org/the-past-decade-in-texas-school-finance/
64.
UraJ. D.FlinkC. M. (2016). Managing the supreme court: The chief justice, management, and consensus. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 26(2), 185–196. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muv037
65.
Watkins-HayesC. (2011). Race, respect, and red tape: Inside the black box of racially representative bureaucracies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21(Supplement 2), i233–i251. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muq096
66.
WilkinsV. M.KeiserL. (2006). Linking passive and active representation by gender: The case of child support agencies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 16(1), 87–102. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mui023
67.
WilkinsV. M.WilliamsB. N. (2008). Black or blue: Racial profiling and representative bureaucracy. Public Administration Review, 68(4), 654–664. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2008.00905.x
68.
WoodB. D.WatermanR. W. (1994). Bureaucratic dynamics. Westview.
69.
WrightK. (2022). An application of the theory of representative bureaucracy, gender concordance, and symbolic representation in the health care context. The American Review of Public Administration, 52(2), 139–153. https://doi.org/10.1177/02750740211049343
70.
XuX.MeierK. J. (2021). Separating symbolic and active representation: A mixed methods study of gender and education in China. Public Management Review, 24(9), 1429–1451. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2021.1900352
71.
ZhuL.WalkerM. B. L. (2013). ‘Too much too young’: Race, descriptive representation, and heterogeneous policy responses in the case of teenage childbearing. Politics, Groups and Identities, 1(4), 528–546. https://doi.org/10.1080/21565503.2013.842928
