Mark D. Bradbury

Representative Bureaucracy: Assessing the Evidence on Active Representation

The theory of representative bureaucracy suggests that a public workforce representative of the people in terms of race, ethnicity, and sex will help ensure that the interests of all groups are considered in bureaucratic decision-making processes. The theory posits that the active representation of group interests occurs because individual bureaucrats reflect the views of those who share their demographic backgrounds. Research in the public administration literature, however, includes only a relatively small number of studies providing evidence consistent with active representation. In addition, that literature is, for the most part, composed of studies that are conducted at an organizational level, making it impossible for us to draw inferences about the behavior of individual bureaucrats without committing an ecological fallacy. Researchers in the field of criminal justice studies, on the other hand, have long tested the relationship between workforce demography and government outcomes and have done so at the individual level and in contexts that allow confidence that the outcomes observed are indeed the product of action by minority or female public servants. Those studies are reviewed, and their findings provide the first definitive evidence of a connection between the presence of diversity in the public workforce and the representation of minority interests.

Evaluating Performance in State Judicial Institutions: Trust and Confidence in the Georgia Judiciary

in large part on citizens’ support for democratic institutions. Without suffi cient levels of public trust and confi dence in the political branches, for example, citizens may choose not to participate in electoral change within these institutions. In the absence of public participation and input, democracy cannot fl ourish. Although such ideas seem intuitively obvious in relation to the executive and legislative branches, the democratic relationship between citizens and the judiciary is less clear, even in those jurisdictions that have elected judges. Yet the effective administration of justice is equally important to a healthy democracy and is critical to the functioning of free markets. As one author has observed, a “strong judiciary is essential for checking potential executive and legislative breaches of the constitutional order, laying the foundations for sustainable economic development, and building popular support for the democratic regime” (Prillaman 2000, 1). In short, a strong, well-managed judiciary is essential to the rule of law. Judiciaries cannot perform their essential functions, however, if citizens lack trust and confi dence that the courts offer a fair, effi cient, and accessible forum for the resolution of disputes.1 Citizen support is an essential prerequisite to judicial legitimacy and effi cacy and therefore to the sustainability of the rule of law (Tyler 1990). If citizens lack confi dence in their judicial institutions, they are likely to look elsewhere for the preservation of law and order and resolve their disputes through informal and potentially more violent means, including vigilante justice. The effective administration of justice thus represents an essen tial lynchpin to the maintenance and stability of any democratic regime. This study assesses the infl uence of citizens’ perceptions of judicial performance on levels of trust and confi dence in the Georgia state judiciary. The concepts are separated and evaluated with regard to the extent to which trust and confi dence in the judiciary are shaped by a series of independent variables related to judicial independence, effi ciency, access, and information. Building on existing research on the courts, several fi ndings emerge. First, different factors shape citizens’ trust (as opposed to confi dence) in judicial institutions, suggesting that important differences may exist between trust and confi dence in the context of state courts. Second, with regard to judicial institutions, African Americans and Hispanics are less trusting than are whites but are no less confi dent in the court system. A signifi cant racial divide exists in A State and Local Government Review Vol. 38, No. 3 (2006): 176–90

Extreme Outsourcing in Local Government: At the Top and All but the Top

The prevailing paradigm of outsourcing in local government assumes high-level professional administrators make systematic assessments of program areas to determine whether a selected number could be delivered for a reduced cost and at a higher quality by an external provider. This article examines two fundamental deviations from this model occurring in local governments. First, a handful of newly incorporated cities have adopted a wholesale approach to contracting out, relying almost exclusively on private firms and other governmental jurisdictions for the production of core programs while employing only a handful of in-house staff. Conversely, several small towns and cities across North Carolina deliver most services and programs in house by permanent staff but contract out the highest-level administrative position, that of town or city manager. These strategies represent outsourcing at its most extreme and present important practical and paradigmatic challenges to public human resource management in contemporary subnational governance.

Diversity and Citizen Participation: The Effect of Race on Juror Decision Making

Juries rarely receive attention in public administration despite the explicitly “public” nature of their function and the determinative nature of their decision making. Applying the theoretical construct of public participation to jury decision making, we find that Black defendants are less likely to be convicted by juries composed of a higher percentage of Black jurors and are more likely to be convicted by juries composed of a higher percentage of White and Hispanic jurors. Thus, analysis of public participation must account for the relative inclusivity and diversity of participants as this will likely affect the output of the process. In short, diversity matters in public participation.

The Legal and Managerial Challenge of Obesity as a Disability: Evidence from the Federal Courts

The Rehabilitation Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act prohibit discrimination against applicants and employees with disabilities. Following the elements of a prima facie claim of discrimination, this legal brief explores the conditions under which obesity has been deemed a disability. Although obesity is not generally considered a disabling impairment, plaintiffs have successfully brought obesity-related claims based on a rarely implicated definition of disability. The so-called regarded as definition protects those who are not substantially limited by any condition but are subjected to discrimination based on the perception that they are limited by a physical or mental impairment. Although employers have faired well in such obesity-related discrimination claims, a review of federal case law suggests that public human-resource managers are advised to adopt a strategy that reduces the likelihood of obesity-related discrimination, as it is more desirable to avoid potentially litigious behavior than to emerge victorious in court.

Continuity Amid Discontinuity? George W. Bush, Federal Employment Discrimination, and "Big Government Conservatism"

One of the major substantive components of “big government conservatism” was a decided predisposition against public employee unions, toward privileging managerial discretion, and yet still maintaining equal opportunity in the workplace. However, could this predisposition be resolved in practice without harming federal employees’ rights, benefits, and morale in the workplace? To address this question, this article examines whether the attitudes of federal employees toward variants of subjective discrimination in the workplace changed significantly during the George W. Bush presidency. We find that trends related to perceptions of retaliation and discrimination have improved in recent years. However, perceptions of retaliation and discrimination are found to exist among minority and female employees and managers in the federal workplace that require vigilance. These results suggest that big government conservatism’s predisposition to pursue equal opportunity as opposed to affirmative action—while diminishing the power of public employee unions and enhancing managerial prerogatives—either succeeded on its own merits or that the earlier momentum could not be stopped.

Employee job satisfaction and organizational performance: The role of conflict management

Organizational conflict is often thought of as a malady to be avoided or quickly resolved. Such views neglect the potential value of conflict—that is, the constructive management of conflict—to organizational outcomes. Managerial practices resulting in too little conflict may shape and reflect an organization hypersensitive to discord, dissent, and innovation. But management practices promoting excessive conflict may overload an organization with information, rendering it incapable of reaching timely decisions, generating animosity, or creating other unproductive outcomes. This paper examines constructive conflict management, which gives employees voice and encourages authentic participation in decision-making. We hypothesize that such an approach is positively related to employee job satisfaction and organizational performance. However, given the potential for “too much of a good thing” when it encouraging conflict, we also test for a curvilinear relationships between conflict management and organizational outcomes. “To work in an organization is to be in conflict. To take advantage of joint work requires conflict management” (Tjosvold, 2008, p. 19).

A New Era of Protection Against Disability Discrimination? The ADA Amendments Act of 2008 and “Regarded As” Disabled

Several U.S. Supreme Court rulings have substantially narrowed the coverage of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) since its passage in 1990. Congress amended the ADA in 2008 to restore the original congressional intent of providing broad coverage for people with disabilities. This article seeks to determine whether the 2008 amendments are a mere technical adjustment of the ADA, or constitute significant legislation in their own right. A review of existing law, resulting regulations, and federal cases reveals that the amendments may promise much but deliver more of the same. Nevertheless, employers are well-advised to renew their efforts to cooperate with applicants and employees with disabilities, if for no other reason than to avoid a costly lawsuit that employers are perhaps now more likely to lose.

Representation and Diversity in the Federal Government A Critical Review of Government Reports

Academic research of the highest quality has focused on the diversity and representation of the public sector workforce (see Guy & Schumacher, 2009; Pitts & Wise, 2010). Less appreciated are the reports and studies produced by government agencies that are no less rigorous or insightful than academic work and tend to focus more directly on practical and operational implications. This review is unorthodox in that it analyzes and compares four governmental reports on diversity and representation and finds these sources to have considerable value for instructors, researchers, and practitioners alike. The first two reports examine general trends, whereas the latter two focus on specific Federal agencies that present intriguing challenges to the pursuit of diversity, a representative workforce, and equal employment opportunity (EEO).

Toward a Cost-Effectiveness Assessment of State Ethics Commissions: An Analysis of Enforcement Outputs

This article provides an exploratory analysis of the outputs of state government ethics enforcement. Despite the burgeoning interest in the ethical dimensions of public administration among researchers and practitioners alike, there have been few systematic examinations of the actions and outputs of state ethics commissions and boards. Such data are critical to assessing the cost-effectiveness of the subnational ethics edifice. A review of the characteristics of state ethics commissions reveals substantial variation, suggesting that cost-effectiveness is best analyzed state by state. This research relies on data from the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission to examine the outputs of ethics enforcement. The examination of formal orders reveals that all types of officials (elected, appointed, and career) run afoul of ethics laws in myriad ways, with varied levels of severity and consequence. This unique analysis of the outputs of state ethics enforcement is an essential component to understanding the nature, and effectiveness, of ethics in practice.