Advertisement

Discretion from a Sociological Perspective

  • Zachary W. Oberfield
Chapter

Abstract

If we want to understand how bureaucrats behave, we need to reckon with whom they are and how they are influenced by the social forces that they encounter in their workplaces. As such, this chapter asks how newcomers are shaped by the organizations that they enter and what this means for how they use their discretion. To guide this pursuit, the chapter uses the Logic of Appropriateness, a decision-making theory, next to two competing explanatory frameworks for organizational socialization, the dispositional and institutional perspectives. Using these perspectives as a guide, the chapter discusses the findings from a research project that examined how two sets of entering street-level bureaucrats—police officers and welfare caseworkers—developed their approaches to discretion during their first few years on the job.

References

  1. Ajzen, I. (2001). Nature and operation of attitudes. Annual Review of Psychology, 52(1), 27–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barnett, M. (2003). Eyewitness to a genocide: The United Nations and Rwanda. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Bourdieu, P. (1990). The logic of practice. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Brehm, J. & Gates, S. (1997). Working, shirking, and sabotage: Bureaucratic response to a democratic public. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  5. Costa, P. & McCrae, R. (1994). Set like plaster? Evidence for the stability of adult personality. In T. Heatherton & J. Weinberger (Eds) Can personality change? (pp. 21–40). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
  6. Dolan, J. (2000. The senior executive service: Gender, attitudes, and representative bureaucracy. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10(3), 513–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ellwanger, S. (2010). How police officers learn ethics. In M. Braswell, B. McCarthy & B. McCarthy (Eds), Justice, crime and ethics (pp. 45–70). New York: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  8. Etzioni, A. (1969). Preface. In A. Etzioni (Ed.), The semi-professions and their organization: Teachers, nurses, social workers (pp. v–xvii). New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  9. Hafferty, F. (1998). Beyond curriculum reform: Confronting medicine’s hidden curriculum. Academic Medicine, 73(4), 403–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  11. le Grand, J. (2003). Motivation, agency, and public policy: Of knights and knaves, pawns and queens. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Lipsky, M. (1980). Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public service. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  13. Lurie, I. (2006). At the front lines of the welfare system: A perspective on the decline in welfare caseloads. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  14. March, J. (1994). A primer on decision making: How decisions happen. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  15. March, J. & Olsen, J. (2006). The logic of appropriateness. In M. Moran, M. Rein & R. Goodin (Eds), The Oxford Handbook of public policy (pp. 689–708). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  16. ———. (2009). The logic of appropriateness. ARENA: Centre for European Studies.Google Scholar
  17. Maynard-Moody, S. & Musheno, M. (2003). Cops, teachers, counselors: Stories from the front lines of public service. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  18. Oberfield, Z. (2014). Becoming bureaucrats: Socialization at the front lines of government service. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
  19. O’Reilly, C., Chatman, J. & Caldwell, D. (1991). People and organizational culture: A profile comparison approach to assessing person-organization fit. The Academy of Management Journal, 34(3), 487–516.Google Scholar
  20. Perry, J. (1997). Antecedents of public service motivation. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 7(2), 181–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Perry, J. & Hondeghem, A. (2008). Editors’ introduction. In J. Perry & A. Hondeghem (Eds), Motivation in public management: The call of public service (pp. 1–14). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Perry, J. & Wise, L. (1990). The motivational bases of public service. Public Administration Review, 50(3), 367–373.Google Scholar
  23. Portillo, S. & DeHart-Davis, L. (2009). Gender and organizational rule abidance. Public Administration Review, 69(2), 339–347.Google Scholar
  24. Prottas, J. (1979). People-processing: The street-level bureaucrat in public service bureaucracies. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
  25. Rubinstein, J. (1973). City police. New York: Hill and Wang.Google Scholar
  26. Saks, A. & Ashforth, B. (1997). Organizational socialization: Making sense of the past and present as a prologue for the future. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 51(2), 234–279.Google Scholar
  27. Sandfort, J. (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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Schneider, B. (1987). The people make the place. Personnel Psychology, 40(3), 437–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Simon, H. 1997. Administrative behavior: A study of decision-making processes in administrative organizations. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  30. Thaler, R. & Sunstein, C. (2008). Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
  31. van Kleef, D. (2016). Changing the nature of the beast: How organizational socialization contributes to the development of the organizational role identity of Dutch veterinary inspectors. Doctoral thesis, Leiden University.Google Scholar
  32. Van Maanen, J. (1974). Working the street: A developmental view of police behavior. In H. Jacob (Ed.), The potential for reform of criminal justice (pp. 83–130). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  33. Wanous, J. (1992). Organizational entry: Recruitment, selection, and socialization of newcomers. Reading, PA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  34. Watkins-Hayes, C. (2009). The new welfare bureaucrats: Entanglements of race, class, and policy reform. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  35. Weber, M. (1947). The theory of social and economic organization (T. Parsons, Trans.). New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  36. Wilkins, V. & Williams, B. (2008). Black or blue: Racial profiling and representative bureaucracy. Public Administration Review, 68(4), 654–664.Google Scholar
  37. Wilson, J. (1989). Bureaucracy: What government agencies do and why they do it. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  38. Yin, R. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  39. Yoon, K. & Hwang, C. (1995). Multiple attribute decision making: An introduction. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Zachary W. Oberfield
    • 1
  1. 1.Haverford CollegeHaverfordUSA

Personalised recommendations