A Multidimensional Reputation Barometer for Public Agencies: A Validated Instrument.
A Multidimensional Reputation Barometer for Public Agencies: A Validated Instrument.
复制标题
公共机构的多维声誉晴雨表：经过验证的工具。
DOI：
10.1111/puar.13158
复制
发表时间：
2020
影响因子：
8.3
通讯作者：
Overman S
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Overman S
声誉在公共官僚机构的研究中越来越受到关注，但能够区分声誉的子维度并在真实的生活中得到验证的测量方法仍然难以捉摸。作者通过对欧洲化学品管理局的2，100名关键利益相关者的两次调查，演绎地构建，测试和交叉验证了一个调查工具，欧盟化学品监管机构。这一实证工具衡量了一个机构的声誉及其组成部分。这一规模代表了声誉文献的重要贡献，因为它允许学者区分和衡量公共组织的哪些方面的声誉是“众所周知的”，并建立他们的权威要求，以及公共组织的概况如何不同。作者发现，利益相关者与该机构的直接接触是必要的，能够独立地评估声誉的各个方面。实践证据这项研究为从业者提供了一个针对公共部门的声誉晴雨表。它使他们能够以不同的方式衡量其组织在不同利益相关者群体中的声誉。虽然公共组织越来越多地参与声誉管理活动，但我们的实践中出现的一个潜在警告是，管理者可能会转向不明智的方向。我们的研究表明，与私营部门一样，利益相关者也重视“绩效问题”，但在公共监管机构中，程序和道德方面也很重要。为了确保公共机构的良好形象和权威，公共部门的绩效管理转向可能需要通过加强组织对程序和道德方面的关注来补充。
Reputation is of growing interest for the study of public bureaucracies,but a measurement that can discern between the subdimensions of reputation and is validated on real‐life audiences has remained elusive.The authors deductively build,test,and cross‐validate a survey instrument through two surveys of 2,100 key stakeholders of the European Chemicals Agency,the European Union chemicals regulator.This empirical tool measures an agency's reputation and its building blocks.This scale represents an important contribution to reputation literature, as it allows scholars to distinguish and measure which aspects of reputation public organizations are “known for” and build their claim to authority on,as well as how the profiles of public organizations differ.The authors find that direct stakeholder contact with the agency is necessary for stakeholders to be able to evaluate the separate dimensions of reputation independently.Evidence for PracticeThis study equips practitioners with a reputation barometer tailored to the public sector. It allows them to measure the reputation of their organization, in a differentiated fashion, among different stakeholder groups.While public organizations increasingly engage in reputation management activities, a potential caveat that emerges from our exercise is that managers might be steering in non‐astute directions. While our study shows that, as for private actors, “performance matters,” procedural and moral aspects also weigh heavily in the eyes of stakeholders when it comes to public regulators.To secure a positive organizational image and the authority crucial for public agencies to operate, the performance management turn in the public sector may need to be supplemented by an enhanced organizational attention to procedural and moral aspects.