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

Abstract

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.

Human Capital and Administrative Burden: The Role of Cognitive Resources in Citizen‐State Interactions

“…Third, we propose that executive functions will affect how citizens are perceived and, in turn, treated by state actors. Street‐level bureaucrats and other state actors are often motivated to help disadvantaged citizens compensate for their challenges in life (Jilke and Tummers ; Tummers et al ). However, behaviors associated with low executive functioning (poor planning, lack of initiative, missed deadlines, etc.)…”

“…However, behaviors associated with low executive functioning (poor planning, lack of initiative, missed deadlines, etc.) can prove frustrating to state actors who may easily confuse such behaviors with lack of motivation or laziness, which may, in turn, lead them to categorize citizens as undeserving (Aarøe and Petersen ; Hansen ; Jilke and Tummers ). Such negative categorizations make it easier for state actors to rationalize imposing burdens and maintaining rules and requirements that they might otherwise relax for someone they perceive to be trying harder (Maynard‐Moody and Musheno ).…”

Does Administrative Burden Influence Public Support for Government Programs? Evidence from a Survey Experiment

“…Historically, policies for the poor have been shaped by the desire to classify “poor people by merit” and separate the “deserving” from the “undeserving” poor (Katz ). Views of deservingness often reflect whether individuals are viewed as victims of circumstances beyond their control (see Aarøe and Petersen ; Jilke and Tummers ; Thomann and Rapp ).…”

Is it because you can’t, or don’t want to? The implementation of frontline sanctions in Norwegian social assistance

“…These information sets about the clients are often simplified through general beliefs that allow caseworkers to categorise people. The client's main attributes can signal characteristics from certain deserving categories (Jilke & Tummers, 2018). That is, those who are seen as deserving (of help) are more likely to be considered investment worthy (Maynard-Moody & Musheno, 2003) and prioritised due to their efforts and needs (Jilke & Tummers, 2018).…”