Prioritisation in municipal service delivery management: An exploratory qualitative research study in Turkish municipalities

IF 2.1 4区 管理学 Q2 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Mehmet Barca, İhsan Aytekin, Ali Danışman, Halis Kıral, Mustafa Şahin
{"title":"Prioritisation in municipal service delivery management: An exploratory qualitative research study in Turkish municipalities","authors":"Mehmet Barca,&nbsp;İhsan Aytekin,&nbsp;Ali Danışman,&nbsp;Halis Kıral,&nbsp;Mustafa Şahin","doi":"10.1111/1467-8500.12612","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <p>This study attempts to understand to what extent the actual priority setting in the municipalities of Türkiye as a developing country aligns with idealised rational models based on theoretical principles and successful cases in developed countries. For that purpose, the study examines the cases of priority-setting process of service provision in Turkish municipalities through an exploratory qualitative research method involving focus group meetings with the representatives of 30 municipalities and field observation in two municipalities. The findings reveal key aspects of the prioritisation process, including approaches taken by the municipalities, citizen and stakeholder engagement, the role of managers, criteria used for the assessment of alternatives, and evaluation methods. The analysis identifies two distinct patterns, that is the idealised rationalist versus pragmatic, in all the key aspects examined. These findings contribute to a better understanding of what aspects of idealised rationalist and pragmatical decision-making processes are distinct from each other, and to a more comprehensive international perspective in public organisations, especially in which top manager such as the mayor is elected into office in developing countries. The study cautions against uncritical acceptance of oversimplified rationalistic as well as universalistic assumptions behind priority-setting models and advocates for a more substantiated and contextualised understanding of decision-making processes.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Points for practitioners</h3>\n \n <div>\n <ul>\n \n <li>Adopting a priority-setting approach (technique, method, or criteria) necessitates considering the unique conditions and challenges of one's organisation and the local context. It is imperative to blend theoretical principles with practical realities to achieve optimal decision-making and superior outcomes.</li>\n \n <li>Priority setting in public organisations of developing countries diverges from idealised rational models used in developed countries due to contextual factors like culture and limited resources. Policy advisors from international organisations and developed countries should endorse knowledge and experience sharing that acknowledges both ideal and practical realities. Concurrently, practitioners in developing countries must critically assess the applicability of advised models to their specific context before adoption.</li>\n \n <li>If the mayor takes a dominant role in the priority setting that outweighs institutional strategies and priorities, effective prioritisation among alternatives may be hindered. To rebalance power, it is crucial to foster an organisational culture that embraces participative decision-making and professionalism and implements mechanisms such as auditing, transparency, and accountability.</li>\n </ul>\n </div>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":47373,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Public Administration","volume":"83 4","pages":"666-696"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of Public Administration","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8500.12612","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study attempts to understand to what extent the actual priority setting in the municipalities of Türkiye as a developing country aligns with idealised rational models based on theoretical principles and successful cases in developed countries. For that purpose, the study examines the cases of priority-setting process of service provision in Turkish municipalities through an exploratory qualitative research method involving focus group meetings with the representatives of 30 municipalities and field observation in two municipalities. The findings reveal key aspects of the prioritisation process, including approaches taken by the municipalities, citizen and stakeholder engagement, the role of managers, criteria used for the assessment of alternatives, and evaluation methods. The analysis identifies two distinct patterns, that is the idealised rationalist versus pragmatic, in all the key aspects examined. These findings contribute to a better understanding of what aspects of idealised rationalist and pragmatical decision-making processes are distinct from each other, and to a more comprehensive international perspective in public organisations, especially in which top manager such as the mayor is elected into office in developing countries. The study cautions against uncritical acceptance of oversimplified rationalistic as well as universalistic assumptions behind priority-setting models and advocates for a more substantiated and contextualised understanding of decision-making processes.

Points for practitioners

  • Adopting a priority-setting approach (technique, method, or criteria) necessitates considering the unique conditions and challenges of one's organisation and the local context. It is imperative to blend theoretical principles with practical realities to achieve optimal decision-making and superior outcomes.
  • Priority setting in public organisations of developing countries diverges from idealised rational models used in developed countries due to contextual factors like culture and limited resources. Policy advisors from international organisations and developed countries should endorse knowledge and experience sharing that acknowledges both ideal and practical realities. Concurrently, practitioners in developing countries must critically assess the applicability of advised models to their specific context before adoption.
  • If the mayor takes a dominant role in the priority setting that outweighs institutional strategies and priorities, effective prioritisation among alternatives may be hindered. To rebalance power, it is crucial to foster an organisational culture that embraces participative decision-making and professionalism and implements mechanisms such as auditing, transparency, and accountability.
市政服务提供管理的优先次序:土耳其市政当局的探索性定性研究
本研究试图了解,作为一个发展中国家,芬兰市政当局实际确定的优先事项在多大程度上符合基于理论原则和发达国家成功案例的理想化理性模式。为此目的,本研究通过一种探索性质的研究方法审查了土耳其各城市提供服务的优先次序确定过程的案例,其中包括与30个城市的代表举行焦点小组会议,并在两个城市进行实地观察。调查结果揭示了优先排序过程的关键方面,包括市政当局采取的方法、公民和利益相关者的参与、管理者的角色、用于评估替代方案的标准和评估方法。分析确定了两种不同的模式,即理想化的理性主义者与务实主义者,在所有的关键方面进行了检查。这些发现有助于更好地理解理想化的理性主义和实用主义决策过程的哪些方面彼此不同,并有助于在公共组织中更全面的国际视角,特别是在发展中国家,市长等高层管理人员被选举到办公室。该研究告诫人们不要盲目接受过于简化的理性主义和优先设定模型背后的普遍假设,并倡导对决策过程进行更有根据和更有背景的理解。采用优先级设置方法(技术,方法或标准)需要考虑一个组织的独特条件和挑战以及当地环境。要做到决策最优、结果最优,必须将理论原则与实际相结合。由于文化和有限的资源等背景因素,发展中国家公共组织的优先级设置与发达国家使用的理想化理性模式存在分歧。来自国际组织和发达国家的政策顾问应该支持既承认理想现实又承认实际现实的知识和经验分享。同时,发展中国家的从业人员必须在采用建议的模式之前严格评估其具体情况的适用性。如果市长在确定优先事项方面的主导作用超过了机构战略和优先事项,那么可能会妨碍对备选方案进行有效的优先排序。为了重新平衡权力,培养一种支持参与决策和专业精神的组织文化,并实施审计、透明度和问责制等机制至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
9.10%
发文量
26
期刊介绍: Aimed at a diverse readership, the Australian Journal of Public Administration is committed to the study and practice of public administration, public management and policy making. It encourages research, reflection and commentary amongst those interested in a range of public sector settings - federal, state, local and inter-governmental. The journal focuses on Australian concerns, but welcomes manuscripts relating to international developments of relevance to Australian experience.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信