Making nonpunitive accountability matter: Exploring behavioral effects of nonpunitive accountability in a conjoint experiment

IF 4.3 2区管理学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE

Public Administration Pub Date : 2024-08-15 DOI:10.1111/padm.13024

Thomas Schillemans, Marija Aleksovska

{"title":"Making nonpunitive accountability matter: Exploring behavioral effects of nonpunitive accountability in a conjoint experiment","authors":"Thomas Schillemans, Marija Aleksovska","doi":"10.1111/padm.13024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Punitive measures (sanctions) are central to accountability. Their use is however costly as they harm relationships. Prior research shows that punitive measures often remain unused. Public sector actors further operate in informal accountability settings where punitive measures are absent. Additionally, doctrines such as New Public Governance prioritize informal networks above hierarchy and punitive measures. Against this background, we study when and why nonpunitive accountability can be effective. Three theoretical logics are developed for decision‐making behavior under the condition of accountability. We theorize account‐givers are driven by a combination of extrinsic, intrinsic, and relational motivation. A conjoint experiment is used to study decisions (N = 761) of administrative leaders in Denmark in varying nonpunitive accountability conditions. Our findings suggest that a combination of extrinsic motivation and relational motivation explains decisions of account‐givers in nonpunitive settings. The study expands our theoretical knowledge of the behavioral effects of accountability and offers insights for policy practitioners.","PeriodicalId":48284,"journal":{"name":"Public Administration","volume":"107 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Administration","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.13024","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Punitive measures (sanctions) are central to accountability. Their use is however costly as they harm relationships. Prior research shows that punitive measures often remain unused. Public sector actors further operate in informal accountability settings where punitive measures are absent. Additionally, doctrines such as New Public Governance prioritize informal networks above hierarchy and punitive measures. Against this background, we study when and why nonpunitive accountability can be effective. Three theoretical logics are developed for decision‐making behavior under the condition of accountability. We theorize account‐givers are driven by a combination of extrinsic, intrinsic, and relational motivation. A conjoint experiment is used to study decisions (N = 761) of administrative leaders in Denmark in varying nonpunitive accountability conditions. Our findings suggest that a combination of extrinsic motivation and relational motivation explains decisions of account‐givers in nonpunitive settings. The study expands our theoretical knowledge of the behavioral effects of accountability and offers insights for policy practitioners.

查看原文本刊更多论文

让非惩罚性问责制发挥作用：在联合实验中探索非惩罚性问责的行为效果

惩罚措施（制裁）是问责制的核心。然而，使用这些措施代价高昂，因为它们会损害人际关系。先前的研究表明，惩罚性措施往往没有得到使用。公共部门的行为者还在缺乏惩罚措施的非正式问责环境中工作。此外，新公共治理等理论将非正式网络置于等级制度和惩罚措施之上。在此背景下，我们研究了非惩罚性问责何时以及为何有效。我们为问责条件下的决策行为提出了三种理论逻辑。我们从理论上认为，问责者受到外在动机、内在动机和关系动机的共同驱动。我们利用联合实验研究了丹麦行政领导在不同非惩罚性问责条件下的决策（N = 761）。我们的研究结果表明，外在动机和关系动机的结合可以解释非惩罚性环境下会计人员的决策。这项研究拓展了我们对问责制行为效应的理论认识，并为政策实践者提供了启示。

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

Public Administration Multiple-

CiteScore

7.80

自引率

17.10%

发文量

期刊介绍： Public Administration is a major refereed journal with global circulation and global coverage. The journal publishes articles on public administration, public policy and public management. The journal"s reach is both inclusive and international and much of the work published is comparative in nature. A high percentage of articles are sourced from the enlarging Europe and cover all aspects of West and East European public administration.