The Impact of Empathy—Explaining Diversity in Street-Level Decision-Making

Jensen, Didde Cramer; Pedersen, Line Bjørnskov

doi:10.1093/jopart/muw070

Cited by 53 publications

(49 citation statements)

References 86 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is showed that the service behavior group including service communication received poor response from service users, so the level of satisfaction of the service user community is relatively low. This condition reinforces Hardiyansyah's statement, (Hardiansyah, 2015), that communication significantly influences the quality of public services, and street-level staff can build this unique condition (Lipsky, 1980) because in the process of interaction they can transfer value, commitment to people's needs and trust (Cramer & Bjørnskov, 2017;Lipsky, 1980). The previous studies related to service communication mostly focused on organizational communication in conducting services, as well as the strategy and influence of communication to the effectiveness of service organizations.…”

supporting

confidence: 61%

“…program post. Furthermore the studies about street-level staff, mostly talk about the involvement of street-level staff in policies (Cramer & Bjørnskov, 2017;Gofen, 2013), street-level staff behavior (Destler, 2016), and motivation (Liu & L, 2016;Tape & Christine, 2018), from the results of these studies it can be concluded that the performance of street-level staff plays an important role in the occurrence of policy changes in the organization.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Effective Communication in Street Level Staff in Pariaman Regional Public Hospital

Ariany¹,

Novalinda²,

Damsar³

et al. 2020

Proceedings of the International Conference on Public Administration, Policy and Governance (ICPAPG 2019)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Communication has a significant effect on the quality of public services (Hardiyansyah, 2011), therefore communication services are one of the keys to success in the implementation of public services. The phenomenon of service communication problems is reflected in the results of the last 4 years survey conducted at Pariaman Public Hospital (Ariany; kusdarini; Sitriwanti, 2015 Sitriwanti, , 20162017;, shows the public dissatisfaction to the behavior of service providers in the interaction process. Miss understanding happened when communication between officers and the community is not conveyed properly. Work pressure is one of the justifications for the emergence of this phenomenon. The research conducted with qualitative method aims to contribute in solving communication problems in service interactions in hospitals, by presenting a service communication model that is built by communicators, because communicators are important dimensions in the communication process. The communication theory proposed by Stewart L.Tubbs and Sylvia Moss, 2006, there are five output indicators ineffective communication which emphasized more on the communicant is applied in dissecting and analyzing an effective communication model. IntroductionThe process of communication by street-level staff becomes a determining factor of service quality for the public sector service delivery unit. When street-level staff can transfer information to the users through an acceptable communication process, communication can influence service users' perceptions of service quality without focusing only on service outputs. This symptom is showed in the results of research conducted from 2013 to 2016 at three of Government Public Hospitals (RSUD) owned by the government of West Sumatra Province. It is showed that the service behavior group including service communication received poor response from service users, so the level of satisfaction of the service user community is relatively low. This condition reinforces Hardiyansyah's statement, (Hardiansyah, 2015), that communication significantly influences the quality of public services, and street-level staff can build this unique condition (Lipsky, 1980) because in the process of interaction they can transfer value, commitment to people's needs and trust (Cramer & Bjørnskov, 2017;Lipsky, 1980). The previous studies related to service communication mostly focused on organizational communication in conducting services, as well as the strategy and influence of communication to the effectiveness of service organizations. The limitations of studies on the important role of street-level staff communication in building service quality perceptions are still under-examined. As a study conducted by Andi Wahyudi, 2010, examines the urgency of communication in supporting the effectiveness of public service delivery; Liando and Tulung, 2013, examined the effectiveness of government communication of public services in Manado city; and Kusumadinata and Fitriah, 2017, examined the problem of public service communicati...

show abstract

supporting

confidence: 61%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effective Communication in Street Level Staff in Pariaman Regional Public Hospital

Ariany¹,

Novalinda²,

Damsar³

et al. 2020

Proceedings of the International Conference on Public Administration, Policy and Governance (ICPAPG 2019)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…When delivering services to citizens, street-level bureaucrats have a certain degree of discretion in their work (Brodkin 1997;Brodkin 2011;Jensen and Pedersen 2017;Hill and Hupe 2009;Olson 2017;Sandfort 2000). Lipsky (1980) sees discretion as the freedom that street-level bureaucrats have in determining the sort, quantity and quality of sanctions and rewards during policy implementation.…”

Section: Street-level Bureaucracy and Discretionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Which Clients are Deserving of Help? A Theoretical Model and Experimental Test

Jilke

Tummers

2018

Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory

212

168

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Street-level bureaucrats have to cope with high workloads, role conflicts, and limited resources. An important way in which they cope with this is by prioritizing some clients, while disregarding others. When deciding on whom to prioritize, street-level bureaucrats often assess whether a client is deserving of help. However, to date the notion of the deserving client is in a black box as it is largely unclear which client attributes activate the prevailing social/professional category of deservingness. This article, therefore, proposes a theoretical model of three deservingness cues that street-level bureaucrats employ to determine whom to help: earned deservingness (i.e., the client is deserving because (s)he earned it: “the hardworking client”), needed deservingness (i.e., the client is deserving because (s)he needs help: “the needy client”), and resource deservingness (i.e., the client is deserving as (s)he is probably successful according to bureaucratic success criteria: “the successful client”). We test the effectiveness of these deservingness cues via an experimental conjoint design among a nationwide sample of US teachers. Our results suggest that needed deservingness is the most effective cue in determining which students to help, as teachers especially intend to prioritize students with low academic performance and members of minority groups. Earned deservingness was also an effective cue, but to a lesser extent. Resource deservingness, in contrast, did not affect teachers’ decisions whom to help. The theoretical and practical implications of our findings for discretionary biases in citizen-state interactions are discussed.

show abstract

“…There is little scholarship on the citizen side of service provision. Scholars have focused primarily on how bureaucrats deal with, behave, and make decisions during citizen encounters (e.g., de Boer and Eshuis ; Dubois ; Jensen and Pedersen ; Lipsky ; Loyens and Maesschalck ; Maynard‐Moody and Musheno ; Tummers et al ). As a result, little is known about how citizens assess bureaucrats or the implications for citizens’ assessments of the implementation of policies.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

How Do Citizens Assess Street‐Level Bureaucrats’ Warmth and Competence? A Typology and Test

Boer

2020

Public Administration Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Citizens encounter many street‐level bureaucrats in their lifetime. How do they assess the traits of the bureaucrats they meet? Understanding citizens’ assessments of bureaucrats is important, because citizens are not passive receivers of policies. This article explores citizens’ classifications of street‐level bureaucrats based on their core task. Using a factorial survey (n = 580), three clusters of bureaucrats are identified: those who are regulation oriented, those who are service oriented, and those who are both regulation and service oriented. Then, the article tests how these three types of bureaucrats are assessed on warmth and competence and whether their gender matters. A between‐subjects experiment (n = 1,602) reveals that regulation‐oriented bureaucrats are assessed as least competent and warm. Moreover, regardless of core task, female bureaucrats are assessed as warmer than males. Female and male bureaucrats are assessed as equally competent. This article shows that bureaucrats are stereotyped by citizens and discusses the implications for the public management literature. Evidence for Practice While researchers and practitioners tend to focus on commonalities between street‐level bureaucrats, focusing on differences—for instance, in terms of core task and gender—may be helpful to understand how citizens see and react to their encounters with bureaucrats. Much like street‐level bureaucrats’ stereotypical notions of citizens, citizens stereotype the bureaucrats they encounter. These stereotypes are based on cues related to the bureaucrats’ core task and gender. Especially for regulation‐oriented organizations and street‐level bureaucrats, such as inspectorates, being aware of stereotypes may be useful when engaging with citizens because they are rated as the least competent and warm.

show abstract

The Impact of Empathy—Explaining Diversity in Street-Level Decision-Making

Cited by 53 publications

References 86 publications

The Effective Communication in Street Level Staff in Pariaman Regional Public Hospital

The Effective Communication in Street Level Staff in Pariaman Regional Public Hospital

Which Clients are Deserving of Help? A Theoretical Model and Experimental Test

How Do Citizens Assess Street‐Level Bureaucrats’ Warmth and Competence? A Typology and Test

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About