The Changing Structure of American Cities: A Study of the Diffusion of Innovation

Abstract

The Changing Structure of American Cities: A Study of the Diffusion of Innovation Using historical and numerical analysis and the five-part schema, this study finds that over the past 50 years structural modifications and adaptations by American cities have generally followed the standard S curve of the diffusion of innovation. In tests of Kaufman's and Hirshman's theories of epochs of change from representativeness to administrative efficiency, this study determines that mayor-council cities have, in a standard innovation diffusion S curve, adopted many of the key features of council-manager cities, increasing their administrative efficiency. At the same time, council-manager cities, again in an S curve, have adopted many of the key features of mayorcouncil cities, increasing their political responsiveness. Fewer cities are now either distinctly mayorcouncil or council-manager in form, and most cities are structurally less distinct, constituting a newly merged or hybrid model of local government-the type III city.

Professional versus Political Contexts: Institutional Mitigation and the Transaction Cost Heuristic in Information Systems Outsourcing

“…Consequently, the norms associated with the two different governmental forms map imperfectly to cognition and regulatory practices (Frederickson et al 2004). Furthermore, normative structures may be either supported or contradicted by regulatory or cognitive structures (Giddens 1979).…”

“…Thus, small cities with a mayor-council structure often assumed the norms of professionalism. In the political cluster, 63 of the 115 city governments (55 percent) were mayor-type governments, and 52 of them (45 percent) were councilmanager city governments, suggesting that norms of professionalism have imperfectly diffused through these governments or are being resisted (Frederickson et al 2004). …”

Assessing Open Government Performance through Three Public Administration Perspectives: Efficiency, Democratic Responsiveness, and Legal-rational Process

“…Other scholars have observed cyclical waves of democratic responsiveness in public administration. According to Frederickson, Johnson, and Wood (2004) Overall, e-governance practice of responsiveness and accountability is not being widely practiced despite extensive use of new e-governance initiatives (West, 2004;Justice, Melitski, and Smith 2006), and this is despite the fact that there is good evidence that e-government can improve accountability and transparency (Ahn and Bretschneider, 2011), thereby improving performance of democratic The four ways are 1) accessing, interpreting, and distributing information; 2) demanding accountability of government directly; 3) supporting and encouraging formal oversight actors; and 4) supporting and encouraging other actors to demand accountability (Van Zyl, 2014). A similar assessment tool for accountability has been proposed by Bovens, Schillemans, and Hart (2010) who present threefold criteria for assessing accountability Ingrams, Assessing Open Government Performance through Three Public Administration Perspectives: Efficiency, Democratic Responsiveness, and Legal-rational Process 121 and responsiveness through a democratic perspective, a constitutional perspective, and a learning perspective.…”

Understanding CEO Role Perception and Time Usage: Are New Municipal Typologies Useful?

“…H. George Frederickson, along with Gary Johnson and Curtis Wood, through a number of articles published during the early 2000's (Frederickson & Johnson, 2001;Frederickson, Wood, & Logan, 2001;Frederickson, Logan, & Wood, 2003;Frederickson, Johnson, & Wood, 2004b) and cumulating in the book The Adapted City: Institutional Dynamics and Structural Change (Frederickson, Johnson, & Wood, 2004a), have undertaken a thorough review of the vast diversity of institutional structures that exists in cities within the United States. They develop a new municipal classification system that focuses upon a number of existing structural variables.…”

“…Nelson and Svara (2010) attempted to improve upon this system using a seven category system based primarily upon the allocation of authority, how executive responsibilities are assigned, and administrative accountability (to the mayor or the council). Also, Frederickson, Johnson, and Wood (2004b) developed a new municipal classification system that focuses upon a number of existing structural variables. To better describe the similarities and differences present in municipalities today, their framework splits the two traditional forms of local government into five separate categories including: "Political Cities", "Administrative Cities", "Adapted Political Cities", "Adapted Administrative Cities", and "Conciliated Cities".…”