Although both academics and practitioners recognize that relationships exist between cultural predisposition and support for reform, few attempts have been made in the public sector to gauge them. This study applies the concepts affective commitment, organizational ideology,and political ideology, as established in the organizational behavior literature, to data taken from higher-level federal civil servants at the inception of the Clinton Administration's National Performance Review (NPR). Quantitative analyses confirm the importance of affective commitment to support for NPR and demonstrate that affective commitment varies greatly with organizational type. The study also lends credence to the hypothesis that strong ideologies can prove resistant to induced change. Political ideology appears a relevant factor but only in select agency cultures.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AberbachJ.D.and RockmanB.A. (1976). "Clashing Beliefs within the Executive Branch: The Nixon Administrative Presidency." American Political Science Review70:456–468.
2.
BarzelayM.and ArmajaniB.J. (1993). Breaking Through Bureaucracy.Berkekey: University of California Press.
3.
BrunssonN. (1985). The Irrational Organization: Irrationality as a Basis for Organizational Action and Change.Chichester, England: John Wiley.
4.
BrunssonN.and OlsenJ.B. (1993). The Reforming Organization.London: Routledge.
5.
DownsA. (1967). Inside Bureaucracy. Boston: Little, Brown. Durant, R. (1992). The Administrative Presidency Revisited.Albany: SUNY Press.
6.
FinkS.L. (1992). High Commitment Workplaces.New York: Quorum Books.
7.
GoreA. (1993). Creating Government that Works Better and Costs Less.New York: Times Books.
8.
GoreA (1993). "The New Job of the Federal Executive." A speech reprinted as "Gore on the Future of the Federal Executive." Government Executive (May):52–54.
9.
HammerM.and ChampyJ. (1993). Reengineering the Corporation.New York: Harper Collins.
10.
HarrisR.A.and MilkisS.M. (1989). The Politics of Regulatory Change.New York: Oxford University Press.
11.
HultK.M.and WalcottC. (1990). Governing Public Organizations.Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
12.
KaboolianL. (1998). "The New Public Management: Challenging the Boundaries of the Management vs. Administration Debate." Public Administration Review58:180–193.
13.
KanterR.M.SteinB.A., and JickT.D. (1992). The Challenge of Organizational Change.New York: Free Press.
14.
LeeT.W.and MitchellT.R. (1994). "Organizational Atachment: Attitudes and Actions," in GreenbergJ. (ed.). Organizational Behavior: The State of the Science.Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
15.
LincolnJ.R.and KallenbergA.L. (1990). Culture, Control, and Commitment.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
16.
MarantoR. (1989). "Political Executives and Career Bureaucrats in the Reagan Administration." Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota.
17.
MarantoR. (1993). Politics and Bureaucracy in the Modern Presidency: Appointees and Careerists in the Reagan Administration.Westport, CT: Greenwood.
18.
Maynard-MoodyS.StullD.T., and MitchelK. (1986). "Reorganization as Status Drama: Building, Maintaining, and Displacing Dominant Subcultures." Public Administration Review46:301–310.
19.
McGarityT. (1991). Reinventing Rationality: The Role of Regulatory Analysis in the Federal Bureaucracy.New York: Cambridge University Press.
20.
MertonR.K. (1952). "Bureaucratic Structure and Personality," in MertonR.K. et al. (eds.). Reader in Bureaucracy.Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
21.
MeyerJ.P.and AllenN.J. (1997). Commitment in the Wokplace: Theory, Research, and Application.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
22.
MowdayR.T.PorterL.W., and SteersR.M. (1982). Employee -Organization Linkages.Mew York: Academic Press.
23.
OsborneD.E.and GaeblerT. (1992). Reinventing Government: How the Entrepreneurial Spirit is Transforming the Public Sector.Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
24.
PetersT.J.and WatermanR.H.Jr. (1982). In Search of Excellence.New York: Harper and Row.
25.
PfiffnerJ.P. (1996). The Strategic Presidency: Hitting the Ground Running, 2nd ed.Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas Press.
26.
PollittC. (1993). Managerialism and the Public Service: Cuts or Cultural Change in the 1990's, 2nd ed.Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
27.
PollittC. (1998). "Managerialism Revisited," in PetersB.G. and SavoleD.J. (eds.). Taking Stock.Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press.
28.
RomzekB.S. (1992). "The Dynamics of Employee Commitment," in IngrahamP.W. and KettlD.F. (eds.). Agenda for Excellence.Chatham, NJ: Chatham House.
29.
RomzekB.S. (1989). "Personal Consequences of Emplovee Commitment." Academy of Management Journal32:649–661.
30.
RosenbloomD.H. (1998). "Observations on American Administrative Reform." International Journal of Public Administration21:1393–1421.
31.
ScheinE.H. (1985). Organizational Culture and Leadership.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
32.
ShoopT. (1994). "Exodus." Government Executive (June):42–47.
33.
ThompsonJ.C. (1980). Rolling Thunder.Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.
34.
TrattnerJ.H. (1989). A Survivor's Guide to Government Executives.Lanham, MD: University Press of America.
35.
U.S. Office of Personnel Management (1995a). The Status of the Senior Executive Service.Washington D.C.:Government Printing Office.
36.
U.S. Office of Personnel Management (1995b). U.S. Office of Personnel Management's Significant Characteristics of the SES.Washington D.C.:Government Printing Office.
37.
WatermanR.W. (1989). Presidential Influence and the Administrative State.Knoxville, TN: University of Tennessee Press.
38.
WilsonJ.Q. (1989). Bureaucracy: What Government Agencies Do and Why They Do It.New York: Basic Books.
