Galloping Elephants: Developing Elements of a Theory of Effective Government Organizations

Much of the theory and discourse on public bureaucracies treats them negatively, as if they incline inevitably toward weak performance. This orientation prevails in spite of considerable evidence that many government organizations perform very well, and in spite of many examples of their excellent performance. This article draws on the literature and research on effective government organizations to select and develop conceptual elements of a theory to explain their effectiveness. The available research suggests that such a theory should include the following components. supportive behaviors from external stakeholders such as political authorities; agency autonomy in refining and implementing its mission; high "mission valence" (an attractive mission); a strong, mission-oriented culture, and certain leadership behaviors. The discussion further posits that these factors enhance several forms of motivation of people in the agency-task motivation, mission motivation, and public service motivationthat can be differentiated but that must be linked together in effective government agencies. A corollary of this fact is the falsity of an equally common claim. that public and nonprofit organizations cannot, and on average do not, operate as efficiently as private businesses. . . . (Simon 1998, 1 1) The elephant serves as a virtually archetypical symbol of a large, cumbersome, lumbering being. Yet an elephant can run very fast. Pachyderm means thick-skinned, yet elephants display sensitivity in acts of altruism and nurturance beyond those that 1/Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory For valuable comments on earlier drafts of this paper, I am grateful to Bob Durant, Jameson Doig, Ken Meier, Patrick Wolf, and many of the participants in the theory panel at the 1998 Midwest Political Science Association meeting. I could not take all their comments and critiques into account in my revisions, so they bear no responsibility for limitations

[1]  R. Denhardt,et al.  The Pursuit of Significance , 2000 .

[2]  Herbert A. Simon.  Why Public Administration , 1998 .

[3]  J. S. Legge,et al.  People, Profits, and Service Delivery: Lessons form the Privatization of British Telecom , 1998 .

[4]  Marc Holzer,et al.  Government at Work: Best Practices and Model Programs , 1997 .

[5]  S. Globerman,et al.  A Framework for Evaluating the Government Contracting-Out Decision with an Application to Information Technology , 1996 .

[6]  H. George Frederickson,et al.  The spirit of public administration , 1996 .

[7]  P. E. Crewson,et al.  A Comparative Analysis of Public and Private Sector Entrant Quality , 1995 .

[8]  J C Collins,et al.  Built to Last: Successful Habits of Visionary Companies , 1994 .

[9]  John D. Dilulio.  Principled Agents: The Cultural Bases of Behavior in a Federal Government Bureaucracy , 1994 .

[10]  Patrick J. Wolf.  A Case Survey of Bureaucratic Effectiveness in U.S. Cabinet Agencies: Preliminary Results , 1993 .

[11]  R. Durant.  The Administrative Presidency Revisited: Public Lands, the Blm, and the Reagan Revolution , 1992 .

[12]  Michael Barzelay,et al.  Breaking Through Bureaucracy , 1992 .

[13]  William M. Bowen,et al.  Impossible jobs in public management , 1992 .

[14]  H. Rainey.  Understanding and Managing Public Organizations , 1991 .

[15]  G. Wamsley.  Refounding Public Administration , 1990 .

[16]  James L. Perry,et al.  The Motivational Bases of Public Service , 1990 .

[17]  P. Proudlock.  Achieving high performance , 1990 .

[18]  B. Kellerman.  Leadership and Innovation: A Biographical Perspective on Entrepreneurs in Government , 1988, American Political Science Review.

[19]  John A. Rehfuss.  The job of the public manager , 1988 .

[20]  Patricia W. Ingraham.  Transition and Policy Change in Washington , 1988 .

[21]  Patrick D. Larkey,et al.  The Search for Government Efficiency: From Hubris to Helplessness , 1987, American Political Science Review.

[22]  Jerry T. Mitchell,et al.  Reorganization as Status Drama: Building, Maintaining, and Displacing Dominant Subcultures , 1986 .

[23]  H. G. Frederickson,et al.  The Public Service and the Patriotism of Benevolence , 1985 .

[24]  E. Schein.  Organizational Culture and Leadership: A Dynamic View , 1985 .

[25]  I. Rubin.  Shrinking the Federal Government: The Effect of Cutbacks on Five Federal Agencies , 1985 .

[26]  F. E. Rourke,et al.  Bureaucracy, Politics and Public Policy , 1984 .

[27]  S. Piereson,et al.  In Search of Excellence: Lessons from America's Best-Run Companies. By Thomas J. Peters and Robert H. Waterman, Jr. New York: Harper & Row, 1982 , 1983 .

[28]  H. Rainey,et al.  Public Agencies and Private Firms , 1983 .

[29]  H. Brinton Milward,et al.  Don't Blame the Bureaucracy! , 1983, Journal of Public Policy.

[30]  Richard L. Daft,et al.  Organization Theory and Design , 1983 .

[31]  R. H. Waterman,et al.  In search of excellence : lessons from America's best-run companies , 1983 .

[32]  G. Yukl,et al.  Leadership in Organizations , 1981 .

[33]  Allen H. Barton,et al.  A Diagnosis of Bureaucratic Maladies , 1979 .

[34]  A. Sikula,et al.  The Values and Value Systems of Governmental Executives , 1973 .

[35]  W. Niskanen.  Bureaucracy and representative government , 1971 .

[36]  F. Kilpatrick,et al.  The image of the federal service , 1964 .