How pre‐ and postrecruitment factors shape role perceptions of European Commission officials

Abstract

Individuals' role perceptions are central guides to their behavior and choices as members of an organization. Understanding organizational dynamics thus requires knowledge about the determinants of such role perceptions, as well as whether-and when-organizations can influence them. This article brings forward a theoretical framework allowing for both prerecruitment (extraorganizational) and postrecruitment (intraorganizational) determinants of individuals' role perceptions, and examines its empirical implications using a large-N data set of temporary officials in the European Commission. We find that intergovernmental and epistemic role perceptions are strongly linked to prerecruitment factors (such as educational and professional background), whereas postrecruitment factors (such as length of affiliation and embeddedness within the Commission) are the main driving force behind supranational and departmental role perceptions. This heterogeneity in the importance of pre-and postrecruitment factors for distinct role perceptions has important consequences for conceptualizing organizational change.

Role Models in the Senior Civil Service: How Tasks Frame the Identification of Senior Bureaucrats with Active and Reactive Roles

“…Even though we know from biographical research that there is substantial movement of SCS across positions and tasks within one ministry, the actors seem to exhibit a specific stance related to their actual position. Albeit substantial progress has been made in understanding socialization processes within organizations (Beyers, 2010;Trondal et al, 2018), further theory development and empirical testing is warranted. Beyond a linear understanding of socialization as an ongoing process deepening over time, new environments, critical events and changing responsibilities and tasks might indeed be much more relevant for the socialization of mature actors in later stages of career.…”

“…SCS can draw on several alternative sources of legitimation for their actions (as e.g., political objectives of the government of the day, professional norms or standards, or loyalty towards the common good). Which of these sources is prioritized by the SCS and the role they hence take and the decisions they make depends on pre-and post-recruitment factors (Trondal et al, 2018). We focus on the latter aspect, that is "the social context and situation in which they find themselves" (Ehn et al, 2003, p. 437).…”

“…(West, 2005, p. 148 f.;Wockelberg, 2014), especially as this dichotomous classification seems to have a strong appeal to SCSs themselves (Cooper, 2018, p. 36). However, scholars early on criticized the artificiality of such an antagonism (Heclo, 1975, p. 83), and many scholars since argued for a duality of both core role conceptions (e.g., Christensen, 1991;Trondal et al, 2018). This might be particularly true for the German case, as SCS "need both professional expertise and political craft" (Jann & Veit, 2021, p. 158).…”

“…However, role definitions in this strand of research (e.g., Trondal's 'decisionmaking dynamics' labeled as intergovernmental, supranational, departmental, and epistemic roles) are strongly geared towards sources of, and conflicts between loyalties. Specific tasks forming functional epistemic communities within departments are not addressed see also Trondal et al (2018). 4.…”

Bureaucratic locus of control

“…By doing this we hope to capture the perceptions of bureaucrats on their role, their organization and the degree of control they have in determining how they fit into it. This exercise contributes to an expanding literature that designs microlevel measures of characteristics of bureaucracy (Bussell, 2017; Lee & Van Ryzin, 2018; Trondal, Murdoch, & Geys, 2017). It builds an empirical tool to investigate aspects of bureaucratic control at the individual level.…”