Does organizational adaptation really matter? How mission change affects the survival of U.S. federal independent agencies, 1933–2011

Abstract

Public administration scholars tend to take for granted that organizational adaptation is important. This common notion that public organizations must adapt to stay alive has not been put to the test in the field of public administration, however. Intriguingly, organization ecologists find that adaptation does not matter and might even be counterproductive for individual organizations. They argue that the absence of adaptation—which they refer to as structural inertia—actually enhances the likelihood of survival. But organization ecologists focus mostly on nonpublic organizations. This prompts the question whether adaptation in public organizations really matters. In this article, we test these contrasting claims (while controlling for design features) on a population of U.S. federal independent public agencies (n = 142). Our findings suggest a subtle narrative. We conclude that proactive adaptation increases termination hazards. But inertia does not seem to significantly enhance survival chances.

Explaining the survival of public organizations: Applying density dependence theory to a population of US federal agencies

“…Relationship between the number of agencies and the hazard rate Note: Based on model 3 9 This contrasts the finding of Boin et al (2010, p. 400) who found no apparent statistical association between sunset clause and survival in their study of 63 New Deal agencies. 10 These findings are in agreement with the findings of Boin et al (2017). 11 One might argue that agencies surviving legislative change are better able to make post-hoc adjustments, but we should note that there is no 'strong survivor' effect at work here since we are not considering cohorts of firms subject to the same legislative interventions.…”

“…It is almost an article of faith to assume that (the leaders of ) public organizations have an impact on their autonomy and survival (Carpenter 2001;Bertelli and Sinclair 2018;Tomic 2018). Many studies in public administration, as well as in business and management and (organizational) sociology, suggest that only those organizations that continuously, and preferably proactively, adapt in anticipation or response to changes in their environment can stay alive (Downs 1967;Thompson 1967;Drazin and Van de Ven 1985;Aldrich 1999;Parker and van Witteloostuijn 2010;Kettl 2016;Boin et al 2017;Corbett and Howard 2017). There are many case studies celebrating how entrepreneurial leaders managed to adapt their public organizations in the light of impending threats (see for instance Doig and Hargrove 1987).…”

“…Ceteris paribus applies here: all else equal it should hold that an increase in federal revenues improves the survival chances of agencies whereas less revenue reduces the chances of agencies surviving. 8 Here we follow Boin et al (2017). VAN WITTELOOSTUIJN ET AL. the mission statement.…”

Competing for father's love? The politics of central government agency termination in China

“…We know that public organizations are generally pretty stable over long periods of time, but also that they are not immortal (Kaufman, 1976), and that their life cycle in general and the termination of specific public organizations is of paramount importance in practical, political, and theoretical terms (Kuipers, Yesilkagit, & Carroll, 2017). Over the past decades, there has been a plethora of studies exploring what drives agency termination in Western democracies (Adam, Bauer, Knill, & Studinger, 2007), including, but not limited to, the United States (Boin, Kofman, Kuilman, Kuipers, & van Witteloostuijn, 2017;Boin, Kuipers, & Steenbergen, 2010;Lewis, 2002;van Witteloostuijn, Boin, Kofman, Kuilman, & Kuipers, 2018), the United Kingdom (Greasley & Hanretty, 2016;James, Petrovsky, Moseley, & Boyne, 2016), Denmark (Mortensen & Green-Pedersen, 2015), Ireland (Maccarthaigh, 2014), and Norway (Rolland & Roness, 2012). In contrast, there are few empirical studies of this salient topic in authoritarian regimes like China (Ma & Christensen, 2018).…”

Coming to Terms with Termination of Public Organizations

“…Starting with Herbert Kaufman's seminal Are Government Organizations Immortal? (1976), scholars on both sides of the Atlantic and beyond studied the transformation of government-including the survival of public organizations Hogwood 1988, 1991;Lewis 2002Lewis , 2004Carpenter and Lewis 2004;Adam et al 2007;Boin et al 2010Boin et al , 2016Rolland and Roness 2011;Park 2013;MacCarthaigh 2014;James et al 2015).…”