CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 186Public Policy and Administration ResearchPublic Administration and GovernanceManagement and Organizational Studies

The Power of the Street-Level Bureaucrat in Public Service Bureaucracies

Prottas, Jeffrey Manditch·1978·Urban Affairs Quarterly
DOI 10.1177/107808747801300302
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The difficulties of controlling the daily behavior of low level bureaucrats has been widely appreciated by both administrators and academic students of bureaucracy. This article provides a theoretically oriented explanation for this fact. Building on the concept of "boundary actor," it places the source of the low level bureaucrat's power in his/ her unique role as mediator between the bureaucracy and its "street-level" environment. The bureaucracy's dependence on its street-level bureaucrats for the efficacious transla tion of its environmental inputs (citizens) into processable units (clients) provides the bureaucrat with the leverage to interfere in the organization's "enforcement sequence." By manipulating the information available to the organization about its clients, the street-level bureaucrat can limit the agency's ability to influence his/ her own behavior. The mechanisms and the political environment of this manipulatory activity are discussed in detail.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/107808747801300302

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • Frontline workers use their discretion in line with their own convictions and visions of justice, often against the prescriptions of management.

    “These individuals use their discretion in line with their own convictions and visions of justice, often against the prescriptions of management (Prottas 1978).”

    From Human Judgment in algorithmic loops: Individual justice and automated <scp>decision‐making</scp> (2022) · cites this paper as Prottas 1978

  • In practice, humans-in-the-loop are diverse frontline workers with varying social and structural conditions, powers, pressures, motivations, and agendas affecting how they exercise judgment in ways unlikely to conform to expectations of the algorithm's designers.

    “in practice the human-in-the-loop could be a police of fi cer, welfare claims processor, human resources of fi cer, or bank clerk; each is situated in widely varying social and structural conditions with different powers, pressures, motivations, and agendas affecting how they exercise judgment in ways which are unlikely to conform to expectations of the algorithm ' s designers.”

    From Human Judgment in algorithmic loops: Individual justice and automated <scp>decision‐making</scp> (2022) · cites this paper as Prottas 1978

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Prottas, J. M.
Affiliations
Harvard University (US)
Corresponding author
Prottas, Jeffrey Manditch
Venue
Urban Affairs Quarterly
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
1978-03
Volume
13
Issue
3
Pages
285-312
ISSN
0042-0816 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1177/107808747801300302
OpenAlex
W2023512779
Cited by
186
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 28 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 1
FWCI
25.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
Urban Affairs Quarterly (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Public Administration › Public Policy and Administration Research
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Public Administration and Governance
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Management and Organizational Studies
Keywords
street-level bureaucrats, bureaucratic control, information manipulation, administrative discretion, political context, public service delivery

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