No abstract

Job satisfaction has long proved an elusive construct in public management research. Typically, research investigating job satisfaction in the public sector has emphasized a direct link between work environment and individual attitudes. But, some argue that the interaction between work environment and employee attitudes is a more accurate starting point for understanding satisfaction. This analysis investigates the effect that bureaucratic and entrepreneurial work environments have on job satisfaction when employee–organization value congruence is introduced as a mediating factor. The results indicate that job satisfaction has a direct negative relationship with centralized work environments and an indirect positive relationship with entrepreneurial ones, and thus highlight a more complex relationship between work environment and job satisfaction than previously thought. While some environmental reforms may directly influence satisfaction, these findings indicate that value congruence is an important individual-level mechanism that can transform the relationship between the external environment and individual attitudes at work.

In theory, nonprofit boards of directors exist to perform mission‐setting and oversight functions that help to ensure organizational accountability. Yet there is evidence that board behavior often falls short of this ideal. Using survey data from a sample of 241 executive directors of nonprofit agencies, we investigated whether nonprofit boards are meeting executive directors’ expectations, and if not, what factors explain this? We find that although board behavior tends to align closely with executive directors’ preferences for involvement in administration and management tasks, there is a greater disconnect between board behavior and executive directors’ preferences for involvement in mission‐setting and oversight duties. Factors that mitigate this gap include organizational professionalization and stability, whereas more extensive reliance on government funding exacerbates it. Female executive directors experience a greater disconnect in their preferences for board involvement and actual board involvement than male executive directors. We conclude by discussing the implications of our findings for both theory and practice.

To what extent do leaders of nonprofit organizations run for elected office? We address this question through an exploratory study using survey data from a random sample of 184 leaders of nonprofit human service organizations in the United States. Drawing upon theories of political ambition, we explore the factors that may shape nascent political ambition (propensity to run) as well as expressive political ambition (running for office). We find that nonprofit leaders are no more likely to run for office than the average citizen, but interest in running is much more common. We identify several individual-level and professional socialization factors associated with political ambition. Our study makes an important theoretical contribution by outlining a model of political ambition for the nonprofit sector that can be tested in future studies, and makes an important practical contribution by highlighting ways that associations and nonprofit industry groups might convert nascent ambition into expressive ambition.

Max Weber is an important figure in Public Administration. Nearly all foundational texts in the field include his theory of bureaucracy. Yet, although the field teaches the core tenets of an efficient bureaucracy, namely, formalization, division of labor, impersonality, and hierarchy, his view of the formally rational thought systems undergirding it and the role of values in shaping bureaucratic action are largely overlooked. An attempt here is made to reexamine Weber’s conceptualization of bureaucracy and review his propositions regarding both the promise and peril it holds for social progress. In order to evaluate the degree to which Weber’s darker propositions have come to fruition and the forces at play acting as bulwarks against them, the relationship between formal and substantive rationality is considered against the backdrop of changing administrative models in the United States. Based on this analysis, a substantive path for the future of Public Administration in the United States is laid out.