{"title":"Public service-oriented work motives across Europe: A cross-country, multi-level investigation","authors":"Fabian Homberg, Jens Mohrenweiser","doi":"10.1177/00208523211045251","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article disentangles the country-specific institutional system at the macro level from individual-level attraction and socialization in measuring public service-oriented work motives across European countries through public–private sector comparisons. We argue that country-specific institutions shape the level of public service-oriented work motives of each country and thereby generate level differences across countries. In contrast, public–private sector differences, (i.e. gaps), in public service-oriented work motives within a country reflect aspects of individual-level attraction and socialization. We use the 2005 and 2010 waves of the European Working Conditions Survey and demonstrate that the levels and gaps are empirically distinct phenomena, contrary to current treatment in the literature. We conclude that the distinction between levels and gaps can advance understanding of the antecedents of public service-oriented work motives and support the institutional theory of public service-oriented work motives. Points for practitioners This article argues and provides evidence for the fact that levels of work motives oriented towards public service that are visible in a cross-country comparison should not be confused with the gap of such work motives inside one country. This distinction is important because in countries where gaps between the sectors are almost non-existent and levels are generally high, interventions geared towards public service-oriented work motives are less likely to be effective.","PeriodicalId":47811,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Administrative Sciences","volume":"89 1","pages":"667 - 684"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Review of Administrative Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00208523211045251","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 article disentangles the country-specific institutional system at the macro level from individual-level attraction and socialization in measuring public service-oriented work motives across European countries through public–private sector comparisons. We argue that country-specific institutions shape the level of public service-oriented work motives of each country and thereby generate level differences across countries. In contrast, public–private sector differences, (i.e. gaps), in public service-oriented work motives within a country reflect aspects of individual-level attraction and socialization. We use the 2005 and 2010 waves of the European Working Conditions Survey and demonstrate that the levels and gaps are empirically distinct phenomena, contrary to current treatment in the literature. We conclude that the distinction between levels and gaps can advance understanding of the antecedents of public service-oriented work motives and support the institutional theory of public service-oriented work motives. Points for practitioners This article argues and provides evidence for the fact that levels of work motives oriented towards public service that are visible in a cross-country comparison should not be confused with the gap of such work motives inside one country. This distinction is important because in countries where gaps between the sectors are almost non-existent and levels are generally high, interventions geared towards public service-oriented work motives are less likely to be effective.
期刊介绍:
IRAS is an international peer-reviewed journal devoted to academic and professional public administration. Founded in 1927 it is the oldest scholarly public administration journal specifically focused on comparative and international topics. IRAS seeks to shape the future agenda of public administration around the world by encouraging reflection on international comparisons, new techniques and approaches, the dialogue between academics and practitioners, and debates about the future of the field itself.