IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rpxmxx/v23y2021i12p1748-1767.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A validated measurement for felt relational accountability in the public sector: gauging the account holder’s legitimacy and expertise

Author

Listed:
  • Sjors Overman
  • Thomas Schillemans
  • Stephan Grimmelikhuijsen

Abstract

The effectiveness of formal public sector accountability mechanisms is largely predicated on the individual perception of accountability. In particular, the individual’s experienced relationship to account holders is key in understanding the effects of formal accountability mechanisms. This article develops a measurement instrument for felt relational accountability in public administration. We measure perceived legitimacy and expertise of the account holder, as crucial relational dimensions applicable to various accountability relations. The instrument was tested and cross validated among two samples of Dutch public employees. We discuss theoretical implications of studying accountability at the actor-level and provide practical applications of the instrument.

Suggested Citation

  • Sjors Overman & Thomas Schillemans & Stephan Grimmelikhuijsen, 2021. "A validated measurement for felt relational accountability in the public sector: gauging the account holder’s legitimacy and expertise," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(12), pages 1748-1767, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:rpxmxx:v:23:y:2021:i:12:p:1748-1767
    DOI: 10.1080/14719037.2020.1751254
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/14719037.2020.1751254
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/14719037.2020.1751254?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:rpxmxx:v:23:y:2021:i:12:p:1748-1767. 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/rpxm .

    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.