The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Motivation, Agency, and Public Policy: Of Knights and Knaves, Pawns and Queens
Open accessAbstract
Can we rely on the public service ethos to deliver high quality public services? Are professionals such as doctors and teachers really public‐spirited altruists—knights—or self‐interested egoists—knaves? And how should the recipients of those services, patients, parents, and pupils, be treated? As passive recipients—pawns—or as active consumers—queens? This book offers answers to these questions. It argues that the original welfare state was designed on the assumptions that those who worked within it were basically altruists or knights and that the beneficiaries were passive recipients or pawns. In consequence, services were often of low quality, delivered in a patronising fashion and inequitable in outcome. However, services designed on an opposite set of assumptions—that public service professionals are knaves and that users should be queens—also face problems: exploitation by unscrupulous professionals, and overuse by demanding consumers, especially middle class ones. The book draws on evidence from Britain and abroad to show that, in fact, public policies designed on the basis that professionals are a mixture of knight and knave and recipients a mixture of pawn and queen deliver better quality and greater equity than policies based on more simplistic assumptions about motivation and agency. In particular, contrary to popular mythology, the book shows that policies that offer choice and competition within public services such as education and health care can deliver both excellence and equity. And policies aimed at building up individual assets and wealth ownership can empower the poor and powerless more effectively than those aimed simply at bolstering their current income.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Impure Altruism and Donations to Public Goods: A Theory of Warm-Glow Giving
Andreoni, J. (1990) · The Economic Journal · doi:10.2307/2234133 · Cited by 5,825
Power, M. (1999) · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198296034.001.0001 · Cited by 992
Cited by
WHAT’S MEASURED IS WHAT MATTERS: TARGETS AND GAMING IN THE ENGLISH PUBLIC HEALTH CARE SYSTEM
BEVAN, G., & HOOD, C. (2006) · Public Administration · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9299.2006.00600.x · Cited by 1,580
Building Theory and Empirical Evidence about Public Service Motivation
Perry, J. L., & Hondeghem, A. (2008) · International Public Management Journal · doi:10.1080/10967490801887673 · Cited by 367
Bellé, N. (2014) · Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory · doi:10.1093/jopart/mut033 · Cited by 332
Motivating Employees of the Public Sector: Does Public Service Motivation Matter?
Anderfuhren-Biget, S., Varone, F., Giauque, D., & Ritz, A. (2010) · International Public Management Journal · doi:10.1080/10967494.2010.503783 · Cited by 152
Academic practice in transition: hidden stories of academic identities
Churchman, D., & King, S. (2009) · Teaching in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/13562510903186675 · Cited by 119
Metadata
- Authors
- Le Grand, J.
- Publisher
- Oxford University PressOxford
- Published
- 2003-09-18
- OpenAlex
- W2482451725
- Cited by
- 922
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 35.95
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Motivation, Agency, and Public Policy: Of Knights and Knaves, Pawns and Queens. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/0199266999.001.0001
- The paper
- Le Grand, J. (2003). Motivation, Agency, and Public Policy: Of Knights and Knaves, Pawns and Queens. https://doi.org/10.1093/0199266999.001.0001
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.