From Rational Myth to Self-Fulfilling Prophecy? Understanding the Persistence of Means–ends Decoupling as a Consequence of the Latent Functions of Policy Enactment

Abstract

Organizations operating in pluralistic institutional environments are facing ever greater pressures to adopt and implement policies and practices that have few if any benefits for their core functions. This situation is characterized by Bromley and Powell as reflective of means–ends decoupling. Current theory suggests that this form of decoupling can be difficult to sustain unless the logic of confidence in the policy/practice is maintained, i.e. actors believe that it is useful, relevant and important. In this study, I argue that part-time working in the UK police service illustrates a sustained case of means–ends decoupling in that its official purpose (to retain the skills and experience of (mainly female) police officers) not only appears to have few benefits for the subunits in which it is implemented, but the practice itself is seen to interfere with the achievement of operational goals, generating efficiency gaps. Despite this situation, the logic of confidence in this practice is maintained. Using Merton’s distinction between the manifest and latent functions of a policy, I argue that this situation can be understood by examining how the policy on part-time working functions latently to increase managers’ accountability regarding the accommodation of part-time working. This means that managers are unwilling to refuse requests for part-time working but its manifest function (the retention of skills and experiences) operates to ameliorate efficiency gaps through a process I term ‘institutional satisficing’. Furthermore, the manifest function of part-time working can be used as a rhetorical tool by managers to justify potentially controversial methods of accommodating part-time officers in frontline roles which can result in the serendipitous recoupling of part-time working to its intended purposes.

Legitimacy Deficits of International Organizations: design, drift, and decoupling at the UN Security Council

“…Decoupling has been observed in many organizations (Bromley and Powell 2012;Dick 2015;Maclean and Behnam 2010;Oliver 1991;Rasche and Gilbert 2015), but is still curiously absent from literature on IOs (but see importantly Kentikelenis et al 2016). It refers to the gaps that tend to emerge between institutions' structures, policies, and practices, and is seen most vividly in the 'famous gaps between norms and behavior' (Meyer 2009, 50).…”

The self‐concept of Ukrainian doctoral students: Means–ends decoupling at the state level

“…It occurs amongst other causes because the implemented practices are compartmentalised from the core goal of the actor, for instance, state, organisation or individual (Bromley & Powell, ). Consequently, means–ends decoupling generates an ‘efficiency gap’ (Dick, , p. 900) and the diversion of critical resources (Bromley & Powell, ). Means–ends decoupling is difficult to sustain unless the (individual) actors maintain confidence in the policy or practice (Bromley & Powell, ; Dick, ).…”

“…Consequently, means–ends decoupling generates an ‘efficiency gap’ (Dick, , p. 900) and the diversion of critical resources (Bromley & Powell, ). Means–ends decoupling is difficult to sustain unless the (individual) actors maintain confidence in the policy or practice (Bromley & Powell, ; Dick, ). If actors gain awareness of the incompatibility between their practices and outcomes, they experience cognitive dissonance (Dick, ) which refers to an individual holding simultaneously two psychologically inconsistent cognitions (Aronson, ).…”

Global education models in national contexts: the establishment of research universities in Ukraine

“…Means-ends decoupling involves a "goal drift or goal displacement" when means become ends in themselves (Grodal & O'Mahony, 2015, p.10; see also (Torenvlied, 1996) which entails an efficiency gap (Dick, 2015;. Dick (2015;see also Bromley & Powell 2012;Meyer & Rowan, 1977) puts forward that means-ends decoupling may be sustained as long as individuals maintain the logic of confidence in the policy and practice. However, if individuals gain awareness of the incompatibility between their practices and outcomes, they experience dissonance.…”

“…However, if individuals gain awareness of the incompatibility between their practices and outcomes, they experience dissonance. Meanwhile, the awareness of individual actors about means-ends decoupling that they sustain may result in the loss of legitimacy or replacement of institutionalised practices (Dick, 2015; see also Seo & Creed, 2002).…”