No abstract

No abstract

Advancements in our knowledge of red tape have been handicapped by a serious neglect in the development of red tape as an organizational concept. Progress has also been hindered by the rather haphazard application of this concept in much of the empirical research. In this paper we examine some of the principal factors that have impeded conceptual development, paying particular attention to the relationship between red tape and bureaucratic formalization. We argue that progress in red-tape research and knowledge requires attention to several issues, including the measurement of red tape, origins and sources of red tape, and the need to consider red tape from the perspective of multiple stakeholders.

Using a measure of red tape based on the amount of time required for the performance of core organizational tasks, hypotheses are tested as to why some organizations have more red tape than others. Among the explanations considered are organizational size, sector, "publicness" defined in terms of governmental interaction and influence independent of sector, and external constraint defined in terms of interorganizational agreements and percentage of time devoted to external activities. The data for the study come from a national study of more than 900 research-intensive organizations. The focus on these organizations assures that the core tasks performed are similar to one another and reduces the likelihood that findings are simply a function of differences in organizational mission. Results indicate that it is useful to think of red tape in terms of diverse dimensions related to key organizational tasks. Both sector and publicness are positively associated with measures of red tape, with publicness providing a somewhat more robust explanation along some dimensions of red tape. Contrary to previous studies, organizational size seems to have little bearing on differences in red tape.

Coordinated community-based education, communication, and adaptation initiatives that are inclusive of local knowledge, values, and context are needed to address the expressed needs of community members associated with prolonged smoke events and wildfire seasons.