Goal Ambiguity in Public Organizations: A Systematic Literature Review

Abstract

In the literature on the public-private organizations is well known that public organizations have more ambiguous elements than private ones, such as ideology and objectives, that negatively influence the enthusiasm (Brunsson, 1986), motivation and performance of public employees (Pandey & Raney, 2006), as well as organizational performance (Chun & Raney, 2005). The close relationship with performance led many public administration scholars to deepen the concept of goal ambiguity in public management. However, given the lack of a univocal conceptualization of the phenomenon, the present work aims to contextualize goal ambiguity in the public administration, carrying out a systematic literature review. The results bring out goal ambiguity methods of measurement, its antecedents and consequences and the relationship between goal ambiguity and performance. From a theoretical point of view, the study allows systematizing the contributions on goal ambiguity, while from a practical point of view, a thorough knowledge of the concept allows public managers and policy-makers to obtain valuable information for the achievement of good organizational performance.

Values, Performance, or Both? How Values-Focused Work Can Benefit From Results-Based Management

“…Prior literature has identified different dimensions of ambiguity in an organization’s overall goal system (Botti & Monda, 2019; Chun & Rainey, 2005; Jung, 2012; Song et al, 2020). The first such dimension refers to the lack of valid and objective performance indicators that provide information about the extent to which the organization achieved or made progress toward achieving its mission (lack of measurability).…”

Negotiating Organizational CulturesThe Evolution of the VOD Platform Implementation in Czech Public Service Television

“…This top-down approach clashed with the decentralized and ad-hoc-based culture of editorial staff. 89) In CT thus, it seems that in the initiation and negotiation phase, the lack of clarity of strategic objectives and weaker strategic management may make it easier for employees themselves to find ways and compromises 90) , but in the last phase, this decentralization of responsibilities, the limits in coordination, and focus and intensity of the management of digitalization even with respect to organizational culture may become an unbeatable obstacle. For further progress, the "practice" of employees carried by their values is no longer sufficient.…”

Leading the Challenge: Leader Support Modifies the Effect of Role Ambiguity on Engagement and Extra-Role Behaviors in Public Employees

“…These types of behaviors provide organizations with a better capacity to respond and adapt to unexpected events and difficulties that have arisen [27]. In the literature on public organizations, it is well known that they have more ambiguous elements and that these negatively influence the enthusiasm, motivation, and performance of public employees [28], but what happens with the extra-role behavior of these organizations? Caillier [29] points out that role ambiguity in a work context reduces voluntary behaviors in the organization.…”