IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/pubmgr/v12y2010i3p341-361.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

In Defense of Bureaucracy

Author

Listed:
  • Laurence J. O'Toole
  • Kenneth J. Meier

Abstract

Managerial capacity, meant as available potential for managerial resources to be deployed when needed, can be considered ‘slack’ in a public organization during normal times, but recent developments in the research literature of public administration suggest that such capacity can sometimes contribute to public program performance. Does managerial capacity help to dampen or eliminate the effects of sizeable and negative budget shocks on the outcomes of public organizations? This question is investigated in a set of 1,000 organizations over an eight-year period. For the most part, and largely due to managerial adjustments, budgetary shocks of 10 percent or more have only limited or no negative impacts on performance in the short term. They do, however, cause a drop in performance for certain outcome measures, both immediately and in the following year. Sufficient managerial capacity, however, mitigates these negative performance effects. The findings point toward a key question with which public managers must wrestle: how to balance the costs of slack against the benefits that capacity-as-slack can generate when environmental shocks threaten to disrupt the operation of public programs.

Suggested Citation

  • Laurence J. O'Toole & Kenneth J. Meier, 2010. "In Defense of Bureaucracy," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(3), pages 341-361, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:pubmgr:v:12:y:2010:i:3:p:341-361
    DOI: 10.1080/14719030903286599
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/14719030903286599
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/14719030903286599?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:pubmgr:v:12:y:2010:i:3:p:341-361. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RPXM20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.