This article presents the findings from a survey of public and private sector managers' perceptions of the formal and informal red tape encountered in their organizations. Formal red tape is perceived to be the result of personnel procedures, whereas the informal red tape is perceived as the constraint caused by the informal influence of the media, public opinion, political parties, and public officials. The article thereby also provides a partial test of the voluminous traditional literature containing assertions that public organizations experience more red tape than private organizations and the contemporary literature containing assertions that private organizations experience equivalent or greater red tape than public organizations. Going beyond typical public-private comparisons that do not consider the consequences of sector differences, the impact of personnel and informal red tape on a significant dependent variable-worker motivation-also is explored in this article.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Allison, G. T.
(1979). Public and private management: Are they fundamentally alike in all unimportant respects?Proceeding for the Public Management-Research Conference, (November 19-20), 37-38.
2.
Appleby, P. H.
(1945). Big democracyNew York: A. A. Knopf.
3.
Argyris, C.
(1957). Personality and organization. New York: Harper & Row.
4.
Barton, A.
(1980). A diagnosis of bureaucratic maladies. In C. Weiss & A. Barton (Eds.), Making bureaucracies work (pp. 27-36). Beverly Hills: Sage.
5.
Benveniste, G.
(1983). Bureaucracy (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Boyd & Fraser.
6.
Blumenthal, M. W.
(1979, January 29). Reflections of a businessman in Washington. Fortune, pp. 110-131.
7.
Blunt, B.
(1987). Employee motivation: Two measurement issues. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 8, 64-67.
8.
Bower, R. C.
, & Roemer, M. I. (1963). Medical staff organization in the smaller hospital. Hospital Management, 96, 46.
9.
Bozeman, B.
(1987). All organizations are public: Bridging public and private organization theories. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
10.
Buchanan, B.
, 11 (1975). Red-tape and the service ethic: Some unexpected differences between public and private managers. Administration and Society, 6, 423-488.
11.
Campbell, A. K.
(1978). Testimony on civil service reform and reorganization. In F. J. Thompson (Ed.), Classics of public personnel policyOak Park, IL: Moore.
12.
Clarkston, K. W.
(1972). Some implications of property rights in hospital management. Journal of Law and Economics, 15:363-384.
13.
Dahl, R. A.
, & Lindblom, C. E. (1976). Politics, economics and welfare. New York: Harper & Row.
14.
Downs, A.
(1967). Inside bureaucracyBoston: Little, Brown.
15.
Fottler, M. D.
(1981). Is management really generic?Academy of Management Journal, 6, 1-12.
16.
Ganster, D. C.
, Hennessey, H. W., & Luthans, F. (1983). Social desirability response effects: Three alternative models. Academy of Management Journal, 26, 321-331.
17.
Golembiewski, R. T.
(1969). Organization development in public agencies: Perspectives on theory and practice. Public Administration Review, 29, 367-377.
18.
Goodsell, C. T.
(1985). The case for bureaucracy (2nd ed.). Chatham, NJ: Chatham House.
19.
Gortner, H. F.
, Mahler, J., & Nicholson, J. B. (1987). Organizational theory: A public perspective. Chicago: Dorsey.
20.
Gouldner, A.
(1954). Patterns of industrial bureaucracyNew York: Free Press.
21.
Hummel, R. P.
(1987). The bureaucratic experience (3rd ed.). New York: St. Martin's.
22.
Kaufman, H.
(1977). Red tape. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
23.
Kilpatrick, F. P.
, Cummings, M. C., & Jennings, M. K. (1964). Source book of a study of occupational values and the image of the federal service. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
24.
Landy, F. J.
, & Guion, R. M. (1970). Development of scales for the measurement of work motivation. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 5, 93-103.
25.
Lodahl, T. M.
, & Kejner, M. (1965). The definition and measurement of job involvement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 49, 24-33.
26.
Merton, R. K.
(1940). Bureaucratic structure and personality. Social Forces, 17, 560-568.
27.
Millett, J. D.
(1966). Organization for the public service. Princeton, NJ: D. Van Nostrand.
28.
Murray, M.
(1975). Comparing public and private management: An exploratory essay. Public Administration Review, 34, 364-371.
29.
Newland, C. A.
(1976). Public personnel administration: Legalistics reforms vs. effectiveness, efficiency, and economy. Public Administration Review, 36, 529-537.
30.
Nigro, F. A.
, & Nigro, L. G. (1989). Modern public administration (7th ed.). New York: Harper & Row.
31.
Patchen, M.
(1965). Some questionnaire measures of employee motivation and morale (Monograph No. 41). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan, Survey Research Center, Institute for Social Science Research.
32.
Perry, J. L.
, & Rainey, H. G., (1988). The public-private distinction in organization theory: A critique and research strategy. Academy of Management Review13(2), 182-201.
33.
Peters, B. G.
(1984). The politics of bureaucracy (2nd ed.). New York: Longman.
34.
Prottas, J. M.
(1979). The street-level bureaucrat in public service bureaucracies. Lexington, MA: Heath.
35.
Rainey, H. G.
(1979). Perceptions of incentives in business and government: Implications for civil service reform. Public Administration Review, 39, 440-448.
36.
Rainey, H. G.
(1983). Public agencies and private firms: Incentives, structures, goals, and individual roles. Administration and Society, 15, 207-242.
37.
Rainey, H. G.
, Backoff, R. W., & Levine, C. H. (1976). Comparing public and private organizations. Public Administration Review, 36, 233-244.
38.
Rainey, H. G.
, Traut, C. & Blunt, B. (1986). Reward expectancies and other work-related attitudes in public and private organizations: A review and extension. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 6: 3 (summer), 50-72.
39.
Ross, B. H.
(1988). Public and private sectors: The underlying differences. Management Review, 77, 28-33.
40.
Rumsfeld, D.
(1979, September 10). A politician-turned-executive surveys both worlds. Fortune, pp. 88-94.
41.
Sayre, W. S.
(1948). The triumph of techniques over purposes. Public Administration Review, 8, 134-137.
42.
Shafritz, J. M.
(1973). Position classification: A behavioral analysis of the public service. New York: Praeger.
43.
Schultze, C. L.
(1970). The role of incentives, penalties and rewards in attaining effective policy. In R. H. Haveman & J. Margolis (Eds.), Public expenditures and policy analysis (pp. 145-172). Chicago: Markham.
44.
Stahl, O. G.
(1976). Public personnel administration. New York: Harper & Row.
45.
Strauss, E.
(1961). The ruling servant. New York: Praeger.
46.
Thompson, F. J.
(1975). Personnel policy in the city: The politics of jobs in Oakland. Berkeley: University of California Press.
47.
Thompson, V. A.
(1975). Without sympathy or enthusiasm. Tuscaloosa, AL: University of Alabama Press.
48.
Wamsley, G. L.
, & Zald, M. N. (1973). The political economy of public organizations. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath.
49.
Warwick, D. P.
(1975). A theory of public bureaucracy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
50.
Weber, M.
(1946). From Max Weber: Essays in sociology (H. H. Gerth & C. W. Mills, Trans. and Eds.). New York: Oxford University Press.
51.
Wherry, R. J.
, & South, J. E. (1977). A worker motivation scale. Personnel Psychology, 30, 613-636.
52.
White House Personnel Office
. (1979). The Malek manual. In F. Thompson (Ed.), Classics of public personnel administration (pp. 159-187). Oak Park, IL: Moore.
