Professionals, discretion and public sector reform in the UK: re-visiting Lipsky
Professionals, discretion and public sector reform in the UK: re-visiting Lipsky
复制标题
DOI：
10.1108/09513550610704662
复制
发表时间：
2006-01-01
影响因子：
2.8
通讯作者：
Kelly, Josie
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Taylor, Ian;Kelly, Josie
目的-旨在研究迈克尔·利普斯基的自由裁量权理论，因为它涉及到公共部门的专业人士作为“街道一级官僚”仍然适用于公共部门的改革，特别是引入增加管理控制的专业人士。设计/方法/方式-主要论文利普斯基的工作，街道一级官僚，街道官僚制定自己的规则和程序来应对政策执行的困境与过去25年左右的公共部门改革有关。文章区分了三种形式的自由裁量权，规则，任务和价值，并评估了这些不同形式的自由裁量权已被改革妥协的程度。例子主要来自学校教师和社会工作者的文献结果-研究结果表明，规则的制定（因此是官僚主义的）街头专业人员的能力-尽管专业人员对管理层的更大责任感以及提供公共政策的组织的目标和目的的明确性是否使他们摆脱了街道一级的官僚机构。研究限制/影响-工作集中在英国，特别是两个专业。但是，它可以适用于任何已经进行公共部门改革的国家，特别是已经实施“新的公共管理”进程和程序的国家。对一系列职业进行深入研究是有余地的，专业和其他在英国和其他地方。实际影响-政策制定者和管理人员应考虑如何积极的方面，促进自由裁量权在工作场所减少需要“规则制定”，以科普困境已经超过了增加层次的官僚机构和“去技能”的专业人士。独创性/价值-利普斯基的许多被引用和有影响力的工作是评价的光公共部门改革约25年以来，它出版。所确定的三种形式的酌处权提供了在工作场所系统适用的范围。
Purpose - Seeks to examine how far Michael Lipsky's theory of discretion as it relates to public sector professionals as "street-level bureaucrats" is still applicable in the light of public sector reform and in particular the introduction of increased managerial control over professionals.Design/methodology/approach - The main thesis in Lipsky's work, Street-Level Bureaucracy, that street-level bureaucrats devise their own rules and procedures to deal with the dilemmas of policy implementation is linked to public sector reform over the past 25 years or so. The article differentiates between three forms of discretion, rule, task and value and assesses the extent to which these different forms of discretion have been compromised by reform. Examples are drawn principally from the literature on school teachers and social workersFindings - The findings suggest that the rule-making (hence bureaucratic) capacity of professionals at street-level is much less influential than before although it is questionable whether or not the greater accountability of professionals to management and clarity of the targets and objectives of organisations delivering public policy has liberated them from the dilemmas of street-level bureaucracy.Research limitations/implications - The work has focussed on the UK and in particular on two professions. However, it may be applied to any country which has undergone public sector reform and in particular where "new public management" processes and procedures have been implemented. There is scope for in-depth studies of a range of occupations, professional and otherwise in the UK and elsewhere.Practical implications - Policy makers and managers should consider how far the positive aspects of facilitating discretion in the workplace by reducing the need for "rule-making" to cope with dilemmas have been outweighed by increased levels of bureaucracy and the "de-skilling" of professionals.Originality/value - Lipsky's much cited and influential work is evaluated in the light of public sector reform some 25 years since it was published. The three forms of discretion identified offer the scope for their systematic application to the workplace.