Public Encounters: The History and Future of Face‐to‐face Contact Between Public Professionals and Citizens

Bartels, Koen P.R.

doi:10.1111/j.1467-9299.2012.02101.x

Cited by 133 publications

(154 citation statements)

References 77 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

125

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Studies of NPM indicate a variable national impact (including in the area of employment) in public sector provided services explained by: differences in the timing of implementation; mediation by legal, institutional, and cultural contexts; the political persuasion of governments; employee resistance; and countries adopting only aspects of its suite of practices (Bach and Bordogna ; Bartels ). This suggests a variable impact across states from NPM on non‐profits, rather than convergence.…”

Section: Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Government Funding, Employment Conditions, and Work Organization in Non‐profit Community Services: A Comparative Study

Cunningham

Baines

Charlesworth

2014

Public Administration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The article provides a comparative exploration of New Public Management (NPM) funding models on the non‐profit sectors in the UK and Australia, and the implications for services, employment conditions, and worker commitment. A degree of convergence exists around the principles of NPM in the two case studies, creating employment regimes of low pay, casualization, and work intensification. Enhanced vulnerability to pay cuts in the UK, and insecurity in Australia are explained by national differences in exposure to recession, industrial relations institutions, and competition, leading to diminishing worker commitment and raising important concerns for policy‐makers as benefits gained from outsourcing to non‐profits are eroded.

show abstract

Section: Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Government Funding, Employment Conditions, and Work Organization in Non‐profit Community Services: A Comparative Study

Cunningham

Baines

Charlesworth

2014

Public Administration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Lipsky's classical theory of street-level bureaucracy has been a core reference for research on service user-welfare state relations for over three and a half decades (see Lipsky 2010Lipsky [1980; for reviews, see e.g. Bartels 2013;Brodkin 2012;Maynard-Moody and Portillo 2010;Meyers and Lehmann Nielsen 2012). The term 'street-level bureaucracy' refers to organizations such as the police, schools and welfare offices, where employees have face-to-face contact with service users.…”

Section: Theory and Previous Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Digitalization, Street‐Level Bureaucracy and Welfare Users' Experiences

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Internet/web‐based forms of communication have increasingly been implemented by welfare agencies. However, there have been few studies of the experiences of welfare service users and the consequences of new technology for welfare service users. To what extent is the new technology adopted by the Norwegian Welfare and Labour Organization (NAV) used, and how do the users apply and experience the new possibilities? Do screen‐to‐screen encounters replace face‐to‐face encounters, and is this trend affected by age, gender, education or type of benefit? To answer these questions, we combine survey data, short‐term fieldwork in welfare reception areas and qualitative interviews with people receiving health and work‐related benefits. Our study indicates that screen‐to‐screen interaction in general does not replace face‐to‐face encounters, as many face‐to‐face encounters are related to screen communication. However, digital competence combined with life circumstances appears to be the source of a new divide between welfare service users.

show abstract

“…Recently, they have been addressed in the scholarly literature on public administration because of the reforming trend of "one-stop shops" (see, e.g. Askim et al, 2011;Bartels, 2013;Minas, 2014). However, the focus in this literature is on the representation of an organizational form rather than on the social interactions and 153 Everyday interaction at the front-line social relations that are played out there.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Everyday interaction at the front-line

Lundberg

Syltevik

2016

Journal of Organizational Ethnography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. AbstractPurpose -The purpose of this paper is to provide a sociological analysis of everyday interaction on the physical front line of the Norwegian welfare state. Design/methodology/approach -The data are from a short-term ethnographic study in the reception/waiting rooms of three local welfare offices. These are important sites for access to benefits and services. The focus is on the situational and interactional aspects: how do people behave and interact with fellow visitors as well as with front line staff in this institutional context? For the analysis, Goffman's conceptual framework on behaviour in public places is combined with concepts from a theory of access to welfare benefits. Findings -The analysis shows how people fill these spaces with different activities, and how they are characterized by a particular type of welfare "officialdom", boundary work and the handling of welfare stigma. Everyday interaction on the front line gives insights into the tensions in an all-in-one welfare bureaucracy and into the implementation of digitalization. The paper concludes that "old" and "new" tensions are expressed and managed at the front line, and suggests that more attention be paid to the new barriers that are developing. Originality/value -The study contributes an ethnographic approach to a seldom studied part of welfare administration. The waiting rooms in the Norwegian welfare organization are actualized as a social arena influenced by new trends in public administration: one-stop shops, a new heterogeneity, activation policies and digitalization processes.

show abstract

Public Encounters: The History and Future of Face‐to‐face Contact Between Public Professionals and Citizens

Cited by 133 publications

References 77 publications

Government Funding, Employment Conditions, and Work Organization in Non‐profit Community Services: A Comparative Study

Government Funding, Employment Conditions, and Work Organization in Non‐profit Community Services: A Comparative Study

Digitalization, Street‐Level Bureaucracy and Welfare Users' Experiences

Everyday interaction at the front-line

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About