Freedom of Bureacratic Behavior

• In a democracy, the individual in public services of street-level bureaucracy (SLB), has a certain agency to choose among different possible courses of action to cope with clients, but how and why may such freedom of bureaucratic behavior be achieved during public service delivery? The first argument is that such coping is either affiliative (i.e., moving towards, approaching clients), or avoidant (i.e., avoiding clients by moving away from/against). Yet, a remaining theoretical issue concerns the question of why the frontline worker employs such freedom, expressed by a specific set of dominating strategies to cope, given these two forms of coping. The second argument is that freedom of bureaucratic behavior in a SLB is restricted to the set of individual coping strategies available, given its Moral Practice Regime (MPR) of the State. Thus, in social work, because of its "attachment-detachment” MPR, coping to approach most clearly involves bending/breaking of rules for clients, or to avoid them by routinizing. In the police, because of its "force-non-force" MPR, coping to approach most clearly contains prioritizing motivated plaintiffs, or to avoid them by aggression. In health, due to its "ethics of care centered" MPR, it mostly concerns patient approach by instrumental action. To approach by using personal resources, or to avoid by rationing, represent common SLB strategies; the former tied to personal traits, and the latter to the SLB position of the individual. Theoretical arguments are empirically supported by an explorative Swedish survey of coping strategies among social work, health care, and police frontline workers.

Ämnesord

SAMHÄLLSVETENSKAP  -- Statsvetenskap (hsv//swe)

SOCIAL SCIENCES  -- Political Science (hsv//eng)

Nyckelord

Freedom

Public service delivery

Bureaucratic behavior

Affiliative-avoidant coping strategies

Human service organizations (HSO)

Moral Practice Regimes (MPR)

Publikations- och innehållstyp

vet (ämneskategori)

kon (ämneskategori)