Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Representative Bureaucracy and Performance pp 239–265Cite as

Palgrave Macmillan

Why Do Representative Bureaucracies Perform Better?

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 291 Accesses

Part of the book series: Executive Politics and Governance ((EXPOLGOV))

Abstract

This study is concerned as much with determining if representative bureaucracies perform better as with understanding why they do so. After describing the methodology, the chapter reports on the findings from in-depth interviews with nearly three dozen senior officials in South African national departments to identify the causal mechanisms, or underlying pathways, connecting bureaucratic representation to organizational performance. Evidence indicates representative bureaucracies perform better because they empathize with and advocate for historically disadvantaged communities, are equipped with linguistic and cultural competencies to serve a diverse citizenry, and can induce compliance, cooperation, and coproduction.

Portions of this chapter were published by Wiley in Fernandez et al. (2018).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Lowi’s typology pertains specifically to public policy in the United States. His distinction between distributive and redistributive policy is not as easy to make in South Africa compared to the United States. These two categories, therefore, were combined when selecting public organizations.

  2. 2.

    A total of 33 interviews were conducted, but only 30 interviews produced usable responses.

References

  • Alford, J. (2014). The multiple facets of co-production: Building on the work on Elinor Ostrom. Public Management Review, 16, 299–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bailey, M. L. (2010). Cultural competency and the practice of public administration. In M. F. Rice (Ed.), Diversity and public administration: Theory, issues, and perspectives (2nd ed., pp. 171–188). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37, 122–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Batson, C. D. (1990). How social is the animal? The human capacity for caring. American Psychologist, 45, 336–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bovaird, T. (2007). Beyond engagement and participation: User and community coproduction of public services. Public Administration Review, 67, 846–860.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brady, H. E., & Collier, D. (Eds.). (2010). Rethinking social inquiry: Diverse tools, shared standards. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chatman, J. A. (1989). Improving interactional organizational research: A model of person-organization fit. Academy of Management Review, 14, 333–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Department of Government Communications (DGC). (2016). South Africa yearbook 2015/16. Pretoria: DGC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Department of Public Service and Administration (DPSA). (1995). White paper on the transformation of the public service. Pretoria: DPSA.

    Google Scholar 

  • DPSA. (1997). Green paper on a conceptual framework for affirmative action and the management of diversity in the public service. Pretoria: DPSA.

    Google Scholar 

  • DPSA. (1998). White paper on affirmative action in the public service. Pretoria: DPSA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dhunpath, R., & Joseph, M. (2014). Multilingualism: Can policy learn from practice? Nordic Journal of African Studies, 23, 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duan, C., & Hill, C. E. (1996). The current state of empathy research. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 43, 261–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenberg, N., & Miller, P. A. (1987). The relation of empathy to prosocial and related behaviors. Psychological Bulletin, 101, 91–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, S., & Sechaba, T. (1992). Comrades against apartheid: The ANC and the South African Communist Party in exile. London, UK: James Currey.

    Google Scholar 

  • Falleti, T. G., & Lynch, J. F. (2009). Context and causal mechanisms in political analysis. Comparative Political Studies, 42, 1143–1166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fernandez, S., Koma, S., & Lee, H. (2018). Establishing the link between representative bureaucracy and performance: The South African case. Governance, 31, 535–553.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goetz, J. L., Keltner, D., & Simon-Thomas, E. (2010). Compassion: An evolutionary analysis and empirical review. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 351–374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, J. (1990). Organizational justice: Yesterday, today, and tomorrow. Journal of Management, 16, 399–432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, J. (1993). The social side of fairness: Interpersonal and informational classes of organizational justice. In R. Cropanzano (Ed.), Justice in the workplace: Approaching fairness in human resource management (pp. 79–103). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gwinner, K. P., Bitner, M. J., Brown, S. W., & Kumar, A. (2005). Service customization through employee adaptiveness. Journal of Service Research, 8, 131–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hedström, P., & Swedberg, R. (1998). Social mechanisms: An introductory essay (pp. 1–33). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hedström, P., & Ylikoski, P. (2010). Causal mechanisms in the social sciences. Annual Review of Sociology, 36, 49–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hindera, J. J. (1993). Representative bureaucracy: Imprimis evidence of active representation in the EEOC district offices. Social Science Quarterly, 74, 95–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horowitz, S. K., & Horowitz, I. B. (2007). The effects of team diversity on team outcomes: A meta-analytic review of team demography. Journal of Management, 33, 987–1015.

    Google Scholar 

  • Houston, G. (2010). The ANC’s armed struggle in the 1980s. In South African Democracy Education Trust, The road to democracy in South Africa, volume 4 [1980–1990], part II (pp. 1037–1170). Pretoria: UNISA Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Houston, G., & Magubane, B. (2006). The ANC’s armed struggle in the 1970s. In South African Democracy Education Trust, The road to democracy in South Africa, volume 2 [1970–1980] (pp. 453–530). Pretoria: UNISA Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hulin, C. L., & Judge, T. A. (2003). Job attitudes. In W. C. Borman, D. R. Ilgen, & R. J. Klimoski (Eds.), Handbook of psychology (pp. 255–276). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Imai, K., Keele, L., & Yamamoto, T. (2010). Identification, inference and sensitivity analysis for causal mediation effects. Statistical Science, 25, 51–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jeffery, A. (2009). People’s war: New light on the struggle for South Africa. Johannesburg: Jonathan Ball Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, B. (2014). Unraveling representative bureaucracy: A systematic analysis of the literature. Administration and Society, 46, 395–421.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kernaghan, K. (1978). Representative bureaucracy: The Canadian perspective. Canadian Public Administration, 21, 489–512.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kiser, L. L. (1984). Toward an institutional theory of citizen coproduction. Urban Affairs Quarterly, 19, 485–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kristof-Brown, A. L., Zimmerman, R. D., & Johnson, E. C. (2005). Consequences of individuals’ fit at work: A meta-analysis of person-job, person-organization, person-group, and person-supervisor fit. Personnel Psychology, 58, 281–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kubler, D., Kobelt, E., & Andrey, S. (2012). Towards a representative bureaucracy: Promoting linguistic representation and diversity in the Swiss and Canadian federal public services. World Political Science Review, 8, 272–296.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lim, H. (2006). Representative bureaucracy: Rethinking substantive effects and active representation. Public Administration Review, 66, 193–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Magubane, B. (2010). The crisis of the garrison state. In South African Democracy Education Trust, The road to democracy in South Africa, volume 4 [1980–1990], part I (pp. 1–62). Pretoria: UNISA Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mahoney, J. (2001). Beyond correlational analysis: Recent innovations in theory and method. Sociological Forum, 16, 575–593.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manyike, T. V., & Lemmer, E. M. (2014). Research in language education in South Africa: Problems and prospects. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 5, 251–258.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marx, A. W. (1992). Lessons of struggle: South African internal opposition, 1960–1990. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mesthrie, R. (2006). Language, transformation and development: A sociolinguistic appraisal of post-apartheid South African language policy and practice. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies, 24, 151–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Midega, M. (2015). The politics of language and representative bureaucracy in Ethiopia: The case of federal government. Journal of Public Administration and Policy Research, 7, 15–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mwaniki, M. (2012). Multilingualism and the public sector in South Africa. Bloemfontein: Sun Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, J. D. (1986). Communication: A crucial factor in public administration. SAIPA—Tydskrif vir Publieke Administrasie (Journal for Public Administration), 21, 77–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, E. (1996). Crossing the great divide: Coproduction, synergy, and development. World Development, 24, 1073–1087.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parliament of the Republic of South Africa. (2012). Use of Official Languages Act, 2012. Cape Town: Parliament of the Republic of South Africa.

    Google Scholar 

  • Percy, S. L. (1984). Citizen participation in the coproduction of urban services. Urban Affairs Quarterly, 19, 431–446.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plaatjie, T. (2006). The PAC’s internal underground activities, 1960–1980. In South African Democracy Education Trust, The road to democracy in South Africa, volume 2 [1970–1980] (pp. 669–702). Pretoria: UNISA Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Republic of South Africa (RSA). (2017). Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, No. 108 of 1996. Pretoria: Government Communication and Information System. https://www.gov.za/documents/constitution-republic-south-africa-1996.

  • Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Statistics South Africa. (2011). 2011 census: Census in brief. Pretoria: Statistics South Africa.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stajkovic, A., & Luthans, F. (1998). Self-efficacy and work-related performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 240–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tshotsho, B. O. (2013). Mother tongue debate and language policy in South Africa. International Journal of Humanities and Science, 3, 39–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turgeon, L., & Gagnon, A. G. (2013a). Representative bureaucracy in Canada. In P. Von Maravic, B. G. Peters, & E. Schroter (Eds.), Representative bureaucracy in action: Country profiles from the Americas, Europe, Africa and Asia (pp. 35–47). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Turgeon, L., & Gagnon, A. G. (2013b). The politics of representative bureaucracy in multilingual states: A comparison of Belgium, Canada and Switzerland. Regional and Federal Studies, 23, 407–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van de Walle, S., Groeneveld, S., & Vandenbussche, L. (2013). Representative bureaucracy in Belgium: Power sharing or diversity? In P. Von Maravic, B. G. Peters, & E. Schroter (Eds.), Representative bureaucracy in action: Country profiles from the Americas, Europe, Africa and Asia (pp. 69–86). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Van Kessel, I. (2000). Beyond our wildest dreams: The United Democratic Front and the transformation of South Africa. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson, G. (1995). Good sewers cheap? Agency-customer interactions in low-cost urban sanitation in Brazil. Washington, DC: World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitaker, G. P. (1980). Coproduction: Citizen participation in service delivery. Public Administration Review, 40, 240–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wieseke, J., Geigenmuller, A., & Kraus, F. (2012). On the role of empathy in customer-employee interactions. Journal of Service Research, 15, 316–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, V. S., & Mullins, W. A. (1978). Representative bureaucracy: Linguistic/ethnic aspects in Canadian public policy. Canadian Public Administration, 21, 513–553.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Indiana University Bloomington, Bloomington, IN, USA

    Sergio Fernandez

Authors
  1. Sergio Fernandez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Fernandez, S. (2020). Why Do Representative Bureaucracies Perform Better?. In: Representative Bureaucracy and Performance. Executive Politics and Governance. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-32134-5_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation