The Role of Bureaucrats’ Discretion in tendency to Public Policy Implementation.

Authors

Abstract

:The aim of present research is to study the role of street-level bureaucrats’ discretion in their tendency to public policy implementation. Research population consists of staff of Qom tax affairs office that involvement in implementation of comprehensive tax plan directly. Finally, 86 people were selected as sample by Morgan table and simple sampling method. Data collection instrument is a questionnaire that its reliability was confirmed by composite reliability and Cronbach’s alpha methods while its validity was confirmed by convergent and divergent methods upon confirmation by elites. Data analysis was conducted by SEM and using Amos22 software package. The findings indicate that the street-level bureaucrats’ discretion has significant positive effect on client meaningfulness and tendency of public policy implementation. Also, the results show that client meaningfulness plays a moderating role in the relationship between bureaucrats’ discretion and bureaucrats’ tendency to public policy implement.

Keywords


بابازاده، و. و یاوری، ا. (1393). مفهوم صلاحیت گزینشی در آرای دیوان عدالت اداری. مجله تحقیقات حقوقی آزاد، دوره 7، شماره 25: 32-1.
پورعزت، ع. ا. (1387). مبانی دانش اداره دولت و حکومت. تهران: انتشارات سمت.
گرجی، ع. ا. و فتحی، ی. (1391). مطالعات تطبیقی نظارت بر اعمال صلاحیت‌های گزینشی. مجله حقوقی دادگستری، شماره 78: 246-211.
هچ، م. ج. (1385). تئوری سازمان، مدرن، نمادین، و تفسیری پست مدرن. ترجمه حسن دانایی‌فرد، تهران: نشر افکار.
Bergen A., & While A. (2005). Implementation deficit’and ‘street‐level bureaucracy’: Policy, practice and change in the development of community nursing issues. Health & Social Care in the Community, 13(1), 1-10.
Brodkin, E. Z. (1997). Inside the welfare contract: Discretion and accountability in state welfare administration. The Social Service Review, 71(1), 1-33.
Byrne, B. M. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. London: Routledge.‏
Calista, D. (1994). Policy implementation. Encyclopedia of Policy Studies, 117-155.
Elmore, R. F. (1979). Backward mapping: Implementation research and policy decisions. Political Science Quarterly, 94(4), 601-616.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981), Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error, Journal of Marketing Research, 39-50.‏
Garcia-Zamor, J. C.,(1996). Obstacles to Public Policy Implementation in the Third World. Advances in Developmental Policy Studies1, 197-209.
Hair, J. F., et al. (2010). Multivariate data analysis: A global perspective. Vol. 7. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.‏
Higgs, M., & Rowland, D. (2005). All changes great and small: Exploring approaches to change and its leadership. Journal of Change Management5(2), 121-151.
Hill, H. C. (2003). Understanding Implementation: Street‐Level Bureaucrats' Resources for Reform. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 13(3), 265-282.
Hupe, P. (2013). Dimensions of discretion: specifying the object of street-level bureaucracy research. Der moderne staat–Zeitschrift für Public Policy, Recht und Management, 6(2), 425-440.
Khalid, K. A. T. (2012). Policy implementation by the new street level bureaucrats in non-profit organizations. Pertanika Journal of Social Science and Humanities, 20(2), 333-352.
May, P. J., & Winter, S. C. (2009). Politicians, managers, and street-level bureaucrats: Influences on policy implementation. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory19(3), 453-476.
O'Toole, L. J. (2000). Research on policy implementation: Assessment and prospects. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 20(2), 263-288.
Sandfort, J. R. (2000). Moving beyond discretion and outcomes: Examining public management from the front lines of the welfare system. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10(4), 729-756.
Tummersn, L. (2011). Explaining the willingness of public professionals to implement new policies: A policy alienation framework. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 77(3), 555-581.
Tummers, L. (2013). Policy alienation and the power of professionals: Confronting new policies. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Tummers, L., & Bekkers, V. (2014). Policy implementation, street-level bureaucracy, and the importance of discretion. Public Management Review, 16(4), 527-547.
Tummers, L. G., Bekkers, V. J. J. M., & Steijn, A. J. (2009). Policy alienation of public professionals: Application in a new public management context. Public Management Review, 11(5), 685-706.
Van Meter, D. S., & Van Horn, C. E. (1975). The policy implementation process a conceptual framework. Administration & Society6(4), 445-488.
Vega, A., Chiasson, M., & Brown, D. (2013). Understanding the causes of informal and formal discretion in the delivery of enterprise policies: a multiple case study. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy31(1), 102-118.
Wagner III, J. A. (1994). Participation's effects on performance and satisfaction: A reconsideration of research evidence. Academy of Management Review, 19(12), 312-330.