CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 535

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Policy Implementation, Street-level Bureaucracy, and the Importance of Discretion

Tummers, Lars, Bekkers, Victor·2014·Public Management Review
DOI 10.1080/14719037.2013.841978
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Street-level bureaucrats implementing public policies have a certain degree of autonomy – or discretion – in their work. Following Lipsky, discretion has received wide attention in the policy implementation literature. However, scholars have not developed theoretical frameworks regarding the effects of discretion, which were then tested using large samples. This study therefore develops a theoretical framework regarding two main effects of discretion: client meaningfulness and willingness to implement. The relationships are tested using a survey among 1,300 health care professionals implementing a new policy. The results underscore the importance of discretion. Implications of the findings and a future research agenda is shown.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/14719037.2013.841978

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 6 references

Research works printed but not linked: 59

  1. 10.5465/amr.2010.0479 · DOI
  2. 10.1017/CBO9780511760914 · DOI
  3. Brehm , J. and Gates , S. 1999 . Working, Shirking, and Sabotage: Bureaucratic Response to a Democratic Public , Ann Arbor, MI : University of Michigan Press .
  4. 10.2307/2111632 · DOI
  5. 10.1086/604228 · DOI
  6. 10.1080/00036810600603377 · DOI
  7. Buffat , A. 2011 . Pouvoir Discrétionnaire Et Redevabilité De La Bureaucratie De Guichet: Les Taxateurs D'une Caisse De Chômage Comme Acteurs De Mise En Oeuvre , Lausanne : Université de Lausanne .
  8. Davis , K. C. 1969 . Discretionary Justice: A Preliminary Inquiry , Baton Rouge, LA : Louisiana State University Press .
  9. Deci , E. L. and Ryan , R. M. 2004 . Handbook of Self-Determination Research , Rochester : University of Rochester Press . NY:
  10. 10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a003544 · DOI
  11. DeVellis , R. F. 2003 . Scale Development: Theory and Applications , Thousand Oaks, CA : Sage .
  12. Evans , T. 2010 . Professional Discretion in Welfare Services: Beyond Street-Level Bureaucracy , London : Ashgate .
  13. 10.1111/j.1540-6210.2004.00391.x · DOI
  14. Freidson , E. 2001 . Professionalism: The Third Logic , Cambridge : Cambridge University Press .
  15. Green , F. 2008 . “ Work Effort and Worker Well-Being in the Age of Affluence ” . In Effects of Working Hours and Work Addiction: Strategies for Dealing with Them , Edited by: Burke , R. and Cooper , C. L. pp115 – 36. . London : Elsevier . ) ‘’ in (eds)
  16. Hackman , J. R. and Oldham , G. R. 1980 . Work Redesign , Reading, MA : Addison Wesley .
  17. Handler , J. F. 1990 . Law and the Search for Community , Philadelphia, PA : University of Pennsylvania Press .
  18. Hill , M. and Hupe , P. 2009 . Implementing Public Policy , 2nd ed. , Thousand Oaks, CA : Sage .
  19. 10.1111/j.1467-9299.1991.tb00779.x · DOI · Paper page
  20. 10.1111/j.1467-9299.2007.00650.x · DOI
  21. Judson , A. S. 1991 . Changing Behavior in Organization: Minimizing Resistance to Change , Cambridge, MA : Basil Blackwell .
  22. Kimberly , J. R. , De Pouvourville , G. and Thomas , A. D. A. 2009 . The Globalization of Managerial Innovation in Health Care , Cambridge, MA : Cambridge University Press .
  23. Kline , R. B. 2010 . Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling , London : The Guilford Press .
  24. 10.1177/1094428109352528 · DOI
  25. 10.1037/10019-000 · DOI
  26. Lipsky , M. 1980 . Street-Level Bureaucracy , New York : Russell Sage Foundation .
  27. 10.1348/096317904322915892 · DOI · Paper page
  28. 10.1093/jopart/mum030 · DOI
  29. 10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a024272 · DOI
  30. 10.1111/j.1540-6210.2012.02633.x · DOI
  31. 10.3998/mpub.11924 · DOI · Paper page
  32. Maynard-Moody , S. and Portillo , S. 2010 . “ Street-Level Bureaucracy Theory ” . In Oxford Handbook of American Bureaucracy , Edited by: Durant , R. pp. 252 – 77. . Oxford : Oxford University Press . ) ‘’ in (ed)
  33. McGregor , D. 1960 . The Human Side of Enterprise , New York : Wiley .
  34. 10.1002/pam.10078 · DOI
  35. Metselaar E. E. (1997) Assessing the willingness to change: Construction and validation of the DINAMO. Doctoral dissertation Free University of Amsterdam.
  36. Meyers , M. K. and Vorsanger , S. 2003 . “ Street-Level Bureaucrats and the Implementation of Public Policy ” . In Handbook of Public Administration , Edited by: Guy Peters , B. and Pierre , J. pp245 – 54 . London : Sage . ) ‘’ in (eds) · DOI
  37. Muthén , L. and Muthén , B. 1998–2010 . Mplus User's Guide , 6th ed. , Los Angeles, CA : Muthén & Muthén .
  38. 10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a024270 · DOI
  39. Palm , I. , Leffers , F. , Emons , T. , Van Egmond , V. and Zeegers , S. 2008 . De GGz Ontwricht: Een Praktijkonderzoek Naar De Gevolgen Van Het Nieuwe Zorgstelsel in De Geestelijke Gezondheidszorg , Den Haag : SP .
  40. 10.1177/0193841X8400800103 · DOI
  41. 10.1515/9781400820627 · DOI
  42. Power , M. 1997 . The Audit Society: Rituals of Verification , Oxford : Oxford University Press .
  43. Prottas , J. M. 1979 . People Processing: The Street-Level Bureaucrat in Public Service Bureaucracies , Lexington, MA : Lexington Books .
  44. Riccucci , N. M. 2005 . How Management Matters: Street-Level Bureaucrats and Welfare Reform , Georgetown : Georgetown University Press .
  45. 10.1111/j.1541-0072.2005.00133.x · DOI
  46. 10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a024289 · DOI · Paper page
  47. 10.2307/1341488 · DOI
  48. 10.1111/1540-6210.00333 · DOI
  49. 10.1097/00004010-200107000-00002 · DOI
  50. 10.1177/0020852311407364 · DOI
  51. 10.1111/j.1540-6210.2011.02550.x · DOI
  52. 10.1080/14719030902798230 · DOI
  53. 10.1111/j.1467-9299.2011.02016.x · DOI
  54. 10.1080/17405629.2012.686740 · DOI · Paper page
  55. Vinzant , J. C. , Denhardt , J. V. and Crothers , L. 1998 . Street-Level Leadership: Discretion and Legitimacy in Front-Line Public Service , Washington, DC : Georgetown University Press .
  56. Wagner , J. A. 1994 . Participation's Effects on Performance and Satisfaction: A Reconsideration of Research Evidence . Academy of Management Review , 19 ( 2 ) : pp312 – 30 . · DOI
  57. Winter , S. C. 2007 . “ Implementation Perspectives, Status and Reconsideration ” . In The Handbook of Public Administration, Concise Paperback Edition , Edited by: Guy Peters , B. and Pierre , J. pp131 – 141 . New York : Sage . ) ‘(eds) · DOI
  58. 10.1111/j.1540-6210.2011.02496.x · DOI · Paper page
  59. 10.1086/651257 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Tummers, L., & Bekkers, V.
Affiliations
Erasmus University Rotterdam
Venue
Public Management Review
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2013-11-05
Volume
16
Issue
4
Pages
527-547
ISSN
  • 1471-9037
  • 1471-9045
DOI
10.1080/14719037.2013.841978
Cited by
535
References
6
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review