Putting Together the Publicness Puzzle: A Framework for Realized Publicness

In light of the blurring between sectors, it is critical not only to understand public organizations, but also to identify factors that contribute to the achievement of public outcomes across sectors. To what extent does organizational “publicness” lend insight to understanding and managing for public outcomes? By integrating the theory of dimensional publicness with recent work on public values, this analysis presents a framework that defines realized publicness as public outcomes predicted in part by institutions embodying public values. Based on insights from neo‐institutional theory, managing for public outcomes, or managing publicness, requires attention to the combined effects of regulative, associative, and cultural‐cognitive public value institutions. This analysis concludes with a timely application of the realized publicness framework to mortgage lending, demonstrating the importance of conceptualizing influences from diverse types of public value institutions when evaluating a particular initiative, such as the Community Reinvestment Act, and mortgage outcomes.     

The Incorporated Company as an Instrument of Government: A Quest for a Comparative Understanding

Privatization initiatives and the doctrines of "New Public Management" have led to incorporated companies assuming considerable significance within government in many countries. The implications of this development for the structure and operation of the modern state are potentially far-reaching, but are yet to be appropriately comprehended. In response, the article seeks to establish a framework for understanding the basic characteristics and use of companies from a comparative perspective. Attention is focused on their "publicness" and accountability as affected by their ownership, management, financing, and control, which can all involve a varying mix of the "public" and "private" sectors both domestically and internationally. An underlying belief is that a lot more research and analysis are required in this important area of organizational activity.     

Realized Publicness at Public and Private Research Universities

Although research‐extensive universities in the United States produce similar outcomes—research, teaching, and service—they vary substantially in terms of the publicness of their environments. In this article, the authors adopt a public values framework to examine how regulative, normative/associative, and cultural cognitive components affect realized public outcomes by faculty. Using survey data from a random sample of faculty scientists in six fields of science and engineering at Carnegie Research I universities, findings show that organizational and individual public values components are associated predictably with different realized individual public outcomes. For example, individual support from federal resources and affiliation with a federal lab (associative) are related to increased research outcomes, while tuition and fee levels (regulative) explain teaching outcomes, and perceived level of influence in the workplace (cultural cognitive) explains teaching and service outcomes.     

Policy Design and Achieving Social Outcomes: A Comparative Analysis of Social Enterprise Policy

This article compares American, British, and Korean social enterprise policies to explore how government policy design shapes social enterprises and how “social benefit” and “public value” are defined. A social enterprise is defined as the legally structured organizational pursuit of blending social purpose and economic profit through business activities, and examples from each country are presented. Applying Bozeman's publicness theory, the authors demonstrate the wide range of roles that governments play in shaping social enterprises' ownership, funding, and control across the three countries using regulations, subsidies, and procurement policies. These roles may affect the impact of social enterprises in society. The case studies show that the U.S. approach to social enterprise policy is heavily market oriented, while the United Kingdom is in the middle of the market-to-publicness continuum, and South Korea is much closer to the publicness (government-dominated) end of the continuum.     

Cutback Management and the Paradox of Publicness

Cutback management in the public sector poses unique problems. More than 30 years ago, Charles Levine illustrated these problems by discussing the paradoxes of cutback management in public organizations. Building on Levine's work on cutback management and developments in publicness theory, the author provides a contemporary perspective on cutback management. He asserts that publicness creates paradoxical tensions in different domains such as organizational goals, employee motivation, and organizational performance. These tensions need to be embraced in both theoretical discussions of and practical engagement with cutback management. Instead of a short‐term, reductionist approach to cutback management, a holistic and long‐term perspective is necessary.     

Perceptions of Public and Private Performance: Evidence from a Survey Experiment

Media, politicians, and reform proponents frequently assert that public sector organizations are inefficient and burdened by administrative procedures. But are negative stereotypes of the public sector reflected in people's perceptions of public service provision? Given the methodological challenges of isolating the perception of publicness from other factors related to public organizations, little is known about whether public organizations have a negative image. The authors use a survey experimental design to isolate the effect of publicness on perceptions of the performance of hospitals. The results suggest that public sector organizations have a negative image on productivity‐related aspects of performance but not on normative aspects of performance. As this article is a randomized experiment, it provides strong evidence regarding the causal nature of the relationship between publicness and perceptions of performance. Implications for researchers aiming to understand these mechanisms and for public managers concerned about the image of their organization are discussed.     

The challenges of fractionalized property rights in public‐private hybrid organizations: The good,the bad,and the ugly

Policy designers seeking to harness profit‐driven efficiency for public purposes are increasingly creating organizations with fractionalized property rights that distribute “ownership” among public and private actors. The resulting hybrids are quite diverse, including mixed enterprises, public‐private partnerships, social entrepreneurship organizations, government‐sponsored enterprises, and various other hybrid forms. Marrying public purposes to private sector efficiency and strategic flexibility provides a tempting rationale for mixing public and private owners in hybrid organizations. Because public‐private hybrids involve fractionalized property rights, however, they exhibit tension among owners over both strategy and, more importantly, goals. To understand public‐private hybrids, we assess them in terms of six dimensions of property rights: fragmentation of ownership, clarity of allocation, cost of alienation, security from trespass, credibility of persistence, and autonomy (of both owners and managers). The unclear allocation of fractionalized ownership rights facilitates the appropriation of financial residuals and asset ownership opportunistically. Other weaknesses in the property rights configurations of public‐private hybrids create managerial dissonance or opportunistic behavior that typically leads to a narrowing of goals, but sometimes also to organizational failure.     

The Diminishing Publicness of Public Service under the Current Mode of Governance

In this article, it is argued that while there has been an apparent eclipse in discourse regarding the publicness or public quality of public service, the recent transition toward a market-driven mode of governance has created a serious challenge to such publicness. More specifically, the contemporary businesslike changes in the objectives, structures, functions, norms, and users of public service tend to diminish its publicness in terms of its current trends toward eroding public-private distinction, shrinking socioeconomic role, narrowing composition of service recipients, worsening condition of accountability, and declining level of public trust. Based on the existing studies, empirical findings, and country experiences, this article delineates the basic criteria determining the publicness of public service, uses these criteria to demonstrate how the recent businesslike reforms have led to the erosion of such publicness, and makes recommendations for reviving the quality of publicness in public service.     

TURBULENT TRANSITION AND ORGANIZATIONAL CHANCE: RELATING POLICY OUTCOMES TO STRATEGIC ADMINISTRATIVE CAPACITIES

Much of the literature on public policy with its institutional and legislative emphases conveys the view that organizational effectiveness is primarily dependent on actors external to the agency. That is, laws prescribe programs and operating procedures; overlapping jurisdictions restrict innovative behavior; and the politics o f fund budgeting encourage complacency and incrementalism. This article proposes an alternative set of propositions explaining policy outcomes and agency performance as a function of internal administrative considerations. The propositions are empirically evaluated using data from Pacific Coast port authorities during the "container revolution" and environmental movement. The results suggest that variance in strategic performance can be attributed to (1) perceptions about intergovernmental relations and performance gap, (2) an agency micro-structure for strategic planning and policy analysis, and (3) a set of intervening administrative variables.     

马克思主义公私观与中国改革

公和私是表达事实存在的中性名词.公和私的关系有差异、对立、统一、合一等多种形态.把公私与善恶分别对应联系起来是仅限于公私截然对立时才成立.私是个人的社会存在和认识局限所必有,它可以成为社会发展之公的动力,而大公无私是对私的升华和超越.一定程度上可以说,把握公和私在差异中的统一是现代社会的特点,科学的公私观则是解读中国改革的钥匙.     

Last in line: Housing assistance for households with children

Abstract

This article examines the relationship between receipt of different types of rental housing assistance and housing outcomes for households with children. We rely on the 1989 American Housing Survey (AHS) and a special data supplement that attempted to accurately categorize every assisted renter‐occupied address in the AHS sample as either public housing; privately owned, federally assisted housing; or certificates and vouchers. Housing outcomes examined are physical condition of the unit, crowding, affordability, perceived neighborhood quality, and crime. We analyze three research questions: (1) Do the characteristics of households enrolled in housing programs differ by program type? (2) Do housing outcomes differ with the type of assistance received? (3) Do differences in household characteristics account for observed differences in program outcomes?

The analysis suggests that the housing assistance system channels different types of households with children into different housing programs. The least disadvantaged households are most likely to end up in privately owned assisted stock, while the most disadvantaged end up in public housing. The most notable interprogram difference in housing outcomes relates to neighborhood quality. In contrast to other forms of rental assistance, residence in public housing is associated with a decline in neighborhood quality. This result holds even after controlling for household characteristics and geographic location of the unit.     

Quality awards as a public sector benchmarking concept in OECD member countries: some guidelines for quality award organizers

In many OECD member countries, quality awards have become an important benchmarking instrument for public and especially private sector organizations. Quality awards pursue two main goals: one is to introduce elements of competition in areas of the public and the private sectors that lack of market competition; the other is to encourage organizational learning. The problem is that in a public sector context these aims seem to be mutually exclusive. The aim of the article is to show quality award organizers how to realize the full potential of quality awards by making the appropriate choices in the design of a public sector quality award. The conclusion is that the stage of public sector quality management and the degree of ‘publicness’ of the public sector in a given country will influence the competition‐inducing and learning effect of a national quality award in an adverse way. Nevertheless, the negative effects on one or the other element of quality awards can be counterbalanced by the appropriate choice of the scope of the quality award, the area to be evaluated, the evaluation criteria as well as the benchmarking concept. Last but not least, quality award organizers should keep in mind that quality awards are not a benchmarking instrument for all seasons. Copyright © John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Branding and Isomorphism: The Case of Higher Education

Since the New Public Management movement began, public and nonprofit organizations have been adopting and adapting businesslike practices, including branding and marketing. There remains a knowledge gap in understanding why organizational actors choose to allocate resources to adopt branding and marketing policies. This article explores organizational branding initiatives within the context of research extensive (N = 109) higher education institutions in the United States from 2006 to 2013. Seventy‐two universities (66 percent) have introduced branding initiatives since 2006. Findings suggest that the publicness of organizations influences branding and marketing isomorphism in nuanced ways and that organizations are more likely to adopt new branding initiatives to promote higher general performance. Organizations adopt branding strategies in response to national trends and efforts to capitalize on their own strong performance rather than mimicking stronger‐performing peers.     

Evaluating Equity Outcomes in State Public Sectors: A Comparison of Three Housing Agencies

In this article, state public sector Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) outcomes of housing agencies in three states, New South Wales, Queensland and Western Australia are analysed and compared. EEO policies, programs and subsequent outcomes for women in the areas of reducing gender-based job segregation and income disparities, providing avenues for career progression and access to non-traditional jobs are evaluated to determine how different types of administrative and managerial structures influence equity outcomes. The research addresses the question of whether a centralised administrative structure or a devolved corporate management approach provides a more appropriate model for delivering public sector equity policies and programs. The case study findings indicate that a traditional administrative structure based on central control provides no guarantee of better equity results.     

Citizenship and Government: The Challenge for Management in the Public Domain

The domains of the public and private are different. Analysis of management which obscures their distinctive characteristics will miss the significance of each domain. This paper seeks to analyse the values, institutional conditions and management tasks which are unique to the public domain. It is argued that the distinctive challenge for the public domain derives from the duality of publicness: the need to enable citizens in their plurality to express their contribution to the life of the community and out of that plurality, to enable a process of collective choice and the government of action in the public interest to take place.     

Government-Sponsored Enterprises: Reality Catches Up to Public Administration Theory

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are insolvent and in government hands. Political forces led many lawmakers to neglect warnings from public administration academics and practitioners about the vulnerabilities of government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs). Private ownership combined with government backing let the two companies dominate their markets and the political process. GSEs successfully resisted bank-type regulation and capital requirements. The options now include restoring the two GSEs in some form, transforming them into temporary or longer-term wholly owned government corporations, or simply ending them. This article discusses the advantages and drawbacks of each option. Again, the public administration literature provides useful suggestions about organizational alternatives.     

Empirical evidence on the publicness of state legislative activities

Legislation would be a Samuelsonian public good if the cost of creating legislation is not a function of the number of people covered by the legislation. A straighforward test of Samuelsonian publicness is undertaken by estimating the cost of producing legislation as a function of population and other variables, using cross-sectional data from the states of the United States for the years 1965, 1975, and 1985. The empirical results indicate that while legislation does have some degree of publicness, legislation is mostly a private good, and that it has been becoming increasingly less public over time.     

Public versus private production and economies of scale

The cost of producing the same good often differs substantially for public and private producers. We investigate the effect of organization in a case where the production technology is simple: The cleaning of Danish schools. Three forms of organization are used: Decentral municipal, central municipal or private. For small schools the organizational form has little impact on cost. For larger schools decentral municipal production is the most expensive. On average centralization reduces costs by 5%, while privatization reduces costs by 30%. Similar cost differences are reported in the literature for other cases, but it is a new result that the cost differences are due to economies of scale. Public choice theories predict that cost differences are due to ownership or competition. We find evidence that both theories help explain the cost differences.     

Program evaluation and the commissioning entity

The present decade has witnessed a shift from planning to emphasis on program performance and accountability. However, program evaluation must contend with many different policy preferences articulated by groups and institutions involved with social programs. In particular, the entity commissioning an evaluation expects some policy dmileage from the undertaking. Evaluation intended as an aid to decisionmaking cannot afford to separate the program under study from its organizational and political context.Federal categorical social programs like Head Start fill many needs for many groups. Evaluation preoccupied with experimental rigor often underestimates the need to adapt to political and administrative realities. At the other extreme, excessive accommodation to program ideology and organizational self-interest undermines the credibility of the evaluative process.Its limitations notwithstanding, program evaluation does yield informed policy alternatives. It invites rational public discussion of social programs and adds substance to the process of political bargaining.