Work engagement refers to an active energetic state of mind that is characterized by vigor, dedication, and absorption. Despite practitioner's attention for work engagement, few public administration scholars have studied public servants' work engagement empirically. The goal of this study is to extend the job demands-resources (JD-R) model of work engagement using insights from the public administration literature. The analysis of a large-scale survey (N = 9,465) shows that (a) work and personal resources, including public service motivation, are positively related to work engagement; (b) red tape moderates these relationships; and (c) work engagement mediates the relationship between JD-R and job outcomes. In conclusion, public organizations can potentially increase work engagement and inherently employee outcomes by increasing work-related resources (autonomy, cooperation with colleagues) and selecting personnel with a proactive personality and high levels of public service motivation.

Eager to learn from private sector trends, practitioners in (semi)public organizations across the world have recently turned their eyes to the concept of work engagement to improve employee performance. Studies in the private sector show that work engagement is a more robust predictor of performance than, for example, satisfaction. The goal of this study is to find out whether the effects of work engagement on attitudinal, behavioral, and performance outcomes within the semipublic and public sector are also as high as expected and whether these relationships differ between the public, semipublic, and private sector. The results of the cross-sectoral meta-analysis of 130 studies showed that the most noticeable significant sectoral differences can be found in the mean work engagement and the effects of work engagement on the level of attitudinal outcomes (job satisfaction and commitment) and behavioral outcomes (workaholism and turnover intention).

Due to the increasing demanding work environment, public managers need their employees to be proactive and dedicated and feel energetic in their work to reach high performance—that is, public organizations need engaged workers. However, there is a dearth of research examining work engagement in the public sector context in general and in different institutional contexts (e.g., education vis-à-vis central government) in particular. The goal of this study is to examine the relationship between antecedents and outcomes of work engagement in the public sector in general and the within-public sector differences including institutional contexts in particular. Based on the analysis of a large data set, it can be concluded that public servants have different personalities and work in different institutional contexts, and these differences influence their work engagement. The importance of work engagement research in public administration is further confirmed because it leads to higher performance and job satisfaction across sectors.

Red tape has been viewed as a key concept in public administration for decades and one that can significantly impact the human resource management (HRM) process. Theoretically, red tape is argued to (a) constrain organizational practices, (b) alienate employees from their organization and, ultimately, (c) lower performance. However, there is some debate about how detrimental red tape is, and empirical evidence is mixed. Using a meta-analytic approach, we aggregated findings from previous studies to test the impact of red tape and to assess sources of heterogeneity across studies. The results provide support for the constraining and alienating effects of red tape, although red tape’s impact on performance seems negligible. Furthermore, operationalizations of red tape and study context moderate some meta-analytic correlations. The lack of longitudinal and intervention studies and the use of single respondents remain the key limitations of current research, and therefore, future research is still needed.

Given the rhetoric that human resource management (HRM) models adopted by public and private organisations are becoming more similar, this study questions whether the traditional distinction between public and private sector HRM is still relevant. Building from institutional theory, we study continuity and change using four-wave data from eight European countries. We find that the traditional public sector investment in employee well-being continues to be distinctive only for HRM practices aimed at equal opportunities. Private sector organisations, on the other hand, make greater use of performance-oriented HRM practices including compensation and benefits, performance appraisal data, and modern development and career management practices. Cross-sector convergence is explained through coercive and mimetic isomorphic change, while persistent differences indicate that time-honoured public sector values are less susceptible to change. This study provides a muchneeded update of the public-private comparison and a trend analysis of developments over time.