Understanding and Managing Public Organizations The Impact of Political Power and Public Policy.

Understanding and Managing Public Organizations

The Impact of Political Power and Public Policy

Bureaucratic Power• Discussion falls into two camps.

– Bureaus and bureaucrats are seen as independent and influential.– Bureaus and bureaucrats are impotent.

• Both views have some merit. Bureaucratic power is a dynamic mixture of both conditions.

– Numerous cases showing agencies’ responsiveness to President, Courts, Congress

– Also evidence of “bottom up” processes with agencies independently initiating policy

– Proactive behavior of public mangers is a common theme in leadership literature.

Sources of Political Authority and Influence

• Chief executives

• Legislative bodies

• Courts

• Government agencies

• Other levels of government

• Interest groups

• Policy subsystems ands policy communities

• News media

• Public opinion

• Individual citizens

Sources of Political Authority and Influence of Institutions, Entities, and Actors in the Political System

Chief Executives•Appointment of agency heads and other officials•Executive staff and staff offices (for example, budget office)•Initiating legislation and policy directions•Vetoing legislation•Executive orders and directives

Legislative Bodies•Power of the purse: final approval of the budget•Authorizing legislation for agency formation and operations•Approval of executive appointments of officials•Oversight activities: hearings, investigations•Authority of legislative committees•Initiating legislation

Courts•Review of agency decisions•Authority to render decisions that strongly influence agency operations•Direct orders to agencies

Government Agencies•Oversight and management authority (GAO, OMB, OPM, GSA)•Competitors•Allies•Agencies or government units with joint programs

Sources of Political Authority and Influence of Institutions, Entities, and Actors in the Political System

Other Levels of Government• “Higher” and “lower” levels• Intergovernmental agreements and districts

Interest Groups• Client groups• Constituency groups• Professional associations

Policy Subsystems and Policy Communities• Issue networks• Inter-organizational policy networks

News Media• Constitutional protections of freedom of the press• Open meetings laws, Sunshine laws

General Public Opinion• Providing (or refusing to provide) popular support

Individual Citizens• Requests for services, complaints, other contacts

Realities

• Public organizations need support from

– mass publics-broad diffuse populations– attentive publics- more organized groups that are interested in specific

agencies

• The public manager’s concern is to maintain enough authority and discretion to meet organizational goals.

• Bureaucratic power is essential to the fundamental organizational process of gaining financial resources, grants, and other resources from the environment.

Chief Executives• Rivals legislative branch for strongest influence

• Includes Presidents, Governors, Mayors

• Chief executives presumably have the greatest formal power over bureaucracies in their jurisdictions.

• Influence powers are complex and dynamic.

• Methods of influence include:– appointments of agency heads– resources of executive offices can enhance influence – Executive branch proposes initial budget, although legislature approval is

necessary.– Executive Orders

Legislative Bodies• Formal legal authority over agency comes in many forms. A few

examples:– Legislatures– Councils– Commissions

• Legislative bodies have substantial authority over agencies. – Enabling statutes detail agency authority but can be amended.– Statutory authority can be vague or specific. – Budgets– Oversight, including hearings, reports, investigations

• Formal authority always operates in a political context.

• Formal authority can weaken or bolster agency.

Limits on Legislative Power

• Agencies are typically the experts.

• Implementation is a source of power.

• Close scrutiny over agency often has minimal political payoff.– Could jeopardize relationships– Eliminate potential sources of favors for constituents

Courts

• Some experts claim courts exert powerful controls over bureaucracy, while others see them as ineffectual.

• Courts confine agency to statutory authority.

• Require agency to follow due process in rulemaking

Government Agencies and Other Levels of Government

• Relationship of bureaucracy to other bureaucracies and different levels of government can be complex.

• Interdependencies require cooperation.

• Grants sometimes require coordination between agencies.

• Federal system fragments authority.

• Agencies sometimes compete for resources and control over programs.

Interest Groups• Support of organized groups is essential to the well-being

of agency.

• Role of interest groups is controversial.

• Some criticisms– There is a danger that special interest politics will further

fragment the system, complicating communication and coordination.

– System favors some powerful private interests over public interest.

– Agency can become “captive.”– Revolving door

Interest Groups: Not all bad

• Support from constituent groups can

– Bolster and legitimize agency work

– Defend agency against budget cuts

– Provide agency with important information, expert reports

– Competition between interests gives rise to various viewpoints.

News Media• Media attention varies by administration and agency.

• Media attention can shift unpredictably.

• Media tends to take an adversarial stance.

• Bad press can damage budgets, programs, and careers.

• Agencies value good coverage and spend a least 5 hrs per week on matters pertaining to media (Graber, 2003).

• Media serves as a watchdog, reporting government waste and abuses.

Experts on managing relations between government agencies and the news media propose the following:

• Understand the perspective of the media – their skepticism, their need for information and interesting stories, their time pressures.

• Organize media relations carefully – spend time and resources on them and link them with agency operations.

• Get out readable press releases providing good news about the agency; be patient if the media respond slowly.

Source: Adapted from Cohen and Eimicke, 1995; Chase and Reveal, 1983; and Garnett, 1992.

Guidelines for Managing Relations with the News Media

•Respond to bad news and embarrassing incidents rapidly, with clear statements of the agency’s side of the story.

•Seek corrections of inaccurate reporting.

•Use the media to help boost the agency’s image, to implement programs, and to communicate with employees.

•To carry all this off effectively, make sure that the agency performs well, and be honest.

Source: Adapted from Cohen and Eimicke, 1995; Chase and Reveal, 1983; and Garnett, 1992.

Guidelines for Managing Relations with the News Media

• If interrupted in mid-thought, proceed with your original answer before answering the next question.

• Challenge any effort to put words into your mouth.

• Don’t just answer the question; use the question as a springboard to “sell” your agenda.

• If you do not know the answer, say so. Do not speculate.

• If you cannot divulge information, state why in a matter-of-fact way.

• Be positive, not defensive.

• Always tell the truth.

Guidelines for Managing Relations with the News Media

Public Opinion• It’s often difficult to gauge what the public really wants.

• Public regards some agencies as more important than others (e.g. police, defense).

• Public sentiment can help or hinder public management.

• Hargrove and Glidewell (1990) propose an agency classification in relation to public opinion.

– How does the public perceive the agency’s clientele?– Is agency respected?– How important is the agency?

Public Opinion

• General level of support affects agency’s ability to maintain base of political support.

– Praise for NY fire fighters after 9/11

– Periods of antigovernment sentiment often prompt reforms. New institutions and structures can upset the organization and present numerous challenges.

– Changes might include • New lines of authority• New reporting requirements

Different Ways to Describe the Main Actors in the Policy Process

• Iron Triangle– Old name to describe relationship between bureaucracy,

congressional committees, and interest groups. – Relatively stable – Entry into the triangle is rare.

• Issue Network– Businesses, organizations, bureaucracies, individuals, legislative

committees and subcommittees all have interests in policy. All attempt to influence the development and execution of public policy

• Barriers to entering the network are rather low. • Those actively involved in the network at any one time will fluctuate;

and levels of activity will fluctuate.

Congress

Bureau

cracy

Interest

groups

Budget, support of

agency mission

Low regulation

Cam

paign

su

ppor

t

Can lobby for agency support

Favo

rabl

e law

sIm

plementation as

preferred by Congress

Iron Triangle

KingdonKingdon’’s Streamss Streams MetaphorMetaphor

Window of Opportunity

Time

Problem Stream

Policy Stream

Political Stream

Kingdon’s Streams Metaphor• An adaptation of the “garbage can” model

• The streams:– The state of politics and public opinion (the politics

stream)

– The potential solutions to a problem (policy stream)

– Attributes of problems and the attention to them (problem stream)

Kingdon’s Streams Metaphor• Streams are parallel and somewhat independent of

each other.

• Policy entrepreneurs try to join the streams in a “window of opportunity.”

• Window of opportunity: the possibility of policy change