Introduction 1. Woman's Place in Man's Life Cycle 2. Images of Relationship 3. Concepts of Self and Morality 4. Crisis and Transition 5. Women's Rights and Women's Judgment 6. Visions of Maturity References Index of Study Participants General Index

In a Different Voice. Psychological Theory and Women’s Development. Cambridge, MA (Harvard University Press) 1982.

Social Psychology of Organizations

Two types of explanations of state government innovation have been proposed: internal determinants models (which posit that the factors causing a state government to innovate are political, economic, and social characteristics of a state) and regional diffusion models (which point toward the role of policy adoptions by neighboring states in prompting a state to adopt). We show that the two are conceptually compatible, relying on Mohr's theory of organizational innovation. Then we develop and test a unified explanation of state lottery adoptions reflecting both internal and regional influences. The empirical results provide a great degree of support for Mohr's theory. For the empirical analysis, we rely on event history analysis, a form of pooled cross-sectional time series analysis, which we believe may be useful in a wide variety of subfields of political science. Event history analysis may be able to explain important forms of political behavior (by individuals, organizations, or governments) even if they occur only rarely.

https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/S0003055400192561

State Lottery Adoptions as Policy Innovations: An Event History Analysis

In seeking to explain the antecedents of public service motivation, James Perry focuses on the formative role of sociohistorical context. Th is study tests Perry’s theory and examines the role that organizational factors play in shaping public service motivation, based on responses from a national survey of state government health and human service managers. Th e fi ndings support the role of sociohistorical context, showing that public service motivation is strongly and positively related to level of education and membership in professional organizations. Th e results also underscore the signifi cant infl uence of organizational institutions, indicating that red tape and length of organizational membership are negatively related to public service motivation, whereas hierarchical authority and reform eff orts have a positive relationship. Th erefore, public organizations have both an opportunity and a responsibility to create an environment that allows employees to feel they are contributing to the public good.

The Role of Organizations in Fostering Public Service Motivation

Studies of the association between innovation characteristics and innovation adoption at the level of organization are scarce. This study develops direct and moderating hypotheses for the relationship between innovation characteristics, manager characteristics, and innovation adoption in public organizations. The hypotheses are tested using survey data on the adoption of 25 innovations in 725 local governments in the United States and data from a panel of experts. The findings suggest that both innovation characteristics and manager characteristics influence the adoption of innovation; however, they do not reveal significant moderating effects of manager characteristics on the relationship between innovation characteristics and innovation adoption. The implications of the findings are discussed for further research on innovation adoption in the public sector.

Characteristics of Innovation and Innovation Adoption in Public Organizations: Assessing the Role of Managers

Reform waves flowing across the American political landscape are not new. In the states they have paralleled and sometimes preceded national government reforms that began early in this century and extended into recent decades (Garnett, 1980; Conant, 1988, 1992). Shortly after the federal Taft Commission proposed management reforms in 1912, states set a pattern of examining their structures for possible reorganization. Garnett (1980) identified state reorganization waves associated successively with the Taft Commission, the Brownlow Committee of the 1930s, and the first Hoover Commission of 1947-49. Conant suggested a fourth wave of reform in the 1960 to 1980 period that included more than 20 successful comprehensive state reorganizations (1988, 894). We examine the nature of state reforms in the current decade. That state-level comprehensive reforms in the 1990s might center on "reinventing government" should come as no surprise. In their book, Reinventing Government, Osborne and Gaebler (1992) raised issues that confront state administrators and cited state leaders' experiences in developing "entrepreneurial government." From these examples they sought to identify "common threads" to offer as guides (19). After examining one state (Minnesota) in depth, Barzelay (1992) described a "post-bureaucratic paradigm" that he argued marks this next reform. The National Commission on State and Local Public Service, chaired by former Mississippi Governor William Winter, assembled a set of scholarly papers and held regional hearings to explore steps to "revitalize state and local governance" (Thompson, 1993, 1). The commission ultimately issued recommendations overlapping with reinvention. The American states appear to be adopting some changes that are consistent with reinvention recommendations. To explore this development, we surveyed state agency directors in late 1994 and early 1995 and examine here the scope, content, and implementation of reinvention reforms across the 50 states near the midpoint of the present decade. From the National Level to the States: Characteristics of Reinvention Reforms As candidates in 1992, Bill Clinton and Al Gore accepted the reinvention challenge at the national level: We can no longer afford to pay more for--and get less from--our government. The answer for every problem cannot always be another problem or more money. It is time to radically change the way the government operates--to shift from top-down bureaucracy to entrepreneurial government that empowers citizens and communities to change our country from the bottom up (Clinton and Gore, 1992, 23-24). The administration's National Performance Review (NPR) represented a turning point in federal administrative reform. Analysts have carefully reviewed the many specific proposals that emerged from it, as well as the more general reinvention proposals, and tried to place the reforms in a systematic framework. These proposals came from many sources. Osborne and Gaebler described writing their book as a process in which they "journeyed through the landscape of governmental change" and "sought constantly to understand the underlying trends" (1992, 19). Their search produced ten principles that they used to organize the book. These principles have been variously described as a "constellation of ideas" (Frederickson, 1996, 263), a "global movement" present in the private sector and all government levels and drawing on reforms in the U.S. and abroad (Kamensky, 1996, 248-49), a "conflated aggregation" (Fox, 1996, 258), a "grab bag" from which "everyone who is interested gets to pick his or her own particular purpose" (Nathan, 1995, 213); and "a collage of fashionable approaches to reforming organizations" (Arnold, 1995, 414).(1) Critics of reinvention (and of the National Performance Review, specifically) have targeted its deviation from the long-established administrative management tradition. …

Reinventing Government in the American States: Measuring and Explaining Administrative Reform

Research on the federal bureaucracy has long recognized the importance of organization environment for differentiating among agencies and affecting their political support as well as policy outputs. Although the environment has been considered an element in the behavior of state agencies as well, research at this level has been less sensitive to important differences across agency environments. This article identifies four major actors in the policy environment of state agencies--the governor, legislature, clientele groups, and professional associations--and based on a 1978 survey of state administrators, evaluates empirically the influence of these sources over a sample of agencies encompassing all 50 states. Data analysis shows that in addition to agency type, several factors are systematically associated with differences in the nature of the environment confronted, including agency structural characteristics, funding provisions, exogenous shocks to normal operations and state political environment. Jus...

https://www.jstor.org/stable/info/2131140

State Agencies and Their Environments: Examining the Influence of Important External Actors

We wish to acknowledge the assistance and support of this research, which has been provided by the Earhart Foundation of Ann Arbor, Michigan, and the Institute for Research in Social Science at the University of North Carolina. We also express appreciation to Professor Hal G. Rainey for his helpful comments on an earlier draft of this manuscript. This is a revised version of a paper presented at the 1999 meeting of the American Political Science Association.

From Organizational Values to Organizational Roles: Examining Representative Bureaucracy in State Administration

Learning Achievements of Students in Cohort Groups

Previous research has concentrated on differences in gubernatorial power across states. Relatively little research attention has been devoted to the sources of gubernatorial influence over state agencies. Based on data collected from state administrators in 1978, this study examines the effects of four sets of factors on the perceived influence of the governor over the state administrative apparatus. These sets are: formal powers of the governor, characteristics of the agencies, characteristics of the positions held by administrators, and personal characteristics of these officials. Results show that these factors account for nearly one-fourth of the variance in the influence of the governor over state agencies, as reported by agency heads.

/pdf/gubernatorial-influence-and-state-bureaucracy-4dqvj2wrvm.pdf

F. Ted Hebert

Papers

Reinventing Government in the American States: Measuring and Explaining Administrative Reform

State Agencies and Their Environments: Examining the Influence of Important External Actors

From Organizational Values to Organizational Roles: Examining Representative Bureaucracy in State Administration

Learning Achievements of Students in Cohort Groups

Gubernatorial influence and state bureaucracy