Public service motivation and its origins in social services

Power and Politics: Organizational Culture

Public Service/Administration

The theoretical foundation of social services is indeed a nuanced one. The foundation of social services was molded together as a result of combining forces like motivation productivity, diversity, team-building, collaboration and coordination, decision-making, communication processes, and other factors. Each of these items has their own unique histories, dynamics and specific roles within the realm of social services. Exploring each aspect helps to further shed light on the processes individually and collectively and helps one to comprehend the field of social services in a more nuanced and deep manner.

Motivation

"Public service motivation (PSM) is a prominent concept within current Public Administration, as it refers to the drive for public interested and altruistic behavior. Although substantial empirical research on its nature and its impact is available, little is known on the origins of PSM" (Vandenabeele, 2007, p.546). Motivation largely means how interested one is in engaging in service in the public sector and how interested one is in seeing improvements made for needier members of society. While this is true, more and more research is being done on the unique role of motivation and what organizations can do to make people more motivated. For example, one expert who studied the role of public service motivation found that it was directly related to the level one personal experience and socializing, and perhaps even one's socioeconomic class and experience (Moynihan & Pandey, 2007, p.42). Moynihan and Pandey argued that PSM was completely dependent on the way in which "individuals are socialized through sociohistorical institutions -- primarily parental relations, religion, observational learning and modeling during the course of their lives, education, and professional training" (2007). Ultimately, Perry summarizes that an individual's level of education is positively connected to PSM (2007). This is a reasonable finding to encounter, even if one has not read the literature on this particular aspect. The more educated one is the more in tune one is with the rest of the world and the more one is aware of the problems and needs of the world in all its multi-faceted ways. Thus, likewise, it was found that involvement in a professional organization was another factor which contributed to one's level of PSM (Moynihan & Pandey, 2007, p.43).

When it comes to examining the differences between motivation between the public and private sectors the work of researchers Rashid and Rashid truly summarize these nuances well. For instance, they both describe how motivation is an intricate and multifaceted dynamic and which occurs in the workplace as a long struggle for both employers and members of staff (2012). The research study which Rashid and Rashid engaged in helped to determine the difference between motivations as it exists in the public vs. The private sector. "Public sector employees were more motivated by work contents and experience more balance between work and family life, whereas, private sector employees are more motivated by financial rewards, career development opportunities, and supportive environment, as shown in the literature cited and proved by our results" (Rashid & Rashid, 2012, p.28). Findings like these provide concrete ways in which to bolster the level of motivation for team members in a variety of ways.

Findings like these also provoke questions like: how to increase motivation for public service for those with lower levels of education? How to increase motivation for public service for those not in professional organizations? How to create motivating rewards for employees in both sectors that are sustainable over time? How to foster a motivation for public service that comes from a more genuine place?

Productivity

"Productivity is generally de-ned as a measure of the amount of output generated per unit of input" (Linna et al., 2010). Productivity is an absolutely crucial aspect of the public sector, and the public sector absolutely cannot thrive without it. Linna and colleagues cite the work of Thornhill in describing why productivity is so important in the public sector. "First, the public sector is a major employer. Second, the public sector is a major provider of services in the economy, particularly business services (affecting cost of inputs) and social services (affecting labour quality). Third, the public sector is a consumer of tax resources. Changes in public sector productivity may have signi-can't implications for the economy" (2010, p.317). This clearly demonstrates how productivity in the public sector is something which cannot be compromised: it is absolutely essential. However, despite how crucial it is, there is still a tremendous gap in productivity in the public vs. The private sector. According to the director of the Office and Management Budget, Peter Orzag explained, "Public sector productivity growth matched the private sector until about 1987. But something changed in the late 1980s. From 1987 until 1995, private sector productivity rose by an average 4 of 1.5% a year. Meanwhile, the public sector's productivity rose by only 0.4% per year -- or about one-third as much -- over roughly the same period" (tm.gov, 2010). This demonstrates that there is a tremendous gap in productivity among these two arenas and there is a need for direct and concerted action. Given these findings, I would want to explore questions like, "what can be done to improve productivity in the public sector? Why is there such a profound gap in productivity between these two arenas? Furthermore, there's research to suggest that public sector employees are overpaid on average, which also doesn't quite explain the huge gap in productivity.

Team Building

Team-building has long been a crucial aspect to virtually any organization that has enjoyed success over time. For example, "Team building should have nothing to do with ego, tenure or titles, but rather it should be all about competency, collaboration and productivity. Leaders must clearly communicate to team members what their duties, roles, and responsibilities are, as well as setting forth a road map for performance expectations. Team building, group dynamics, talent management, leadership development, and any number of other functional areas are much more about clarity, focus, aligning expectations, and defining roles than creating equality" (Myatt, 2012). In the last twenty years, organizations have come to the realization that the better their employees are at working together, the more successful their organizations will be.

Reductions in budgets in the public sector mean that there is an increased pressure for these organizations to deliver more effectively. Team-building is a verifiable way to ensure a greater success at employee cohesion. Private sector organizations have largely realized this, as private sector organizations more frequently enlist the help of outside organizations such as team-building experts to teach and implement effective means of team-building for their workers. Given these trends in team-building, I would want to further explore: what are the immediate benefits of team building? What are the long-term benefits of team building? What are some of the common mistakes or challenges encountered on the road to team building?

Collaboration and Coordination with Outside Contractors

Effective collaboration and coordination is absolutely essential at both the public and private sector. Collaboration and coordination fundamentally refer to the ability to work well with other agencies and entities so that work is done in a manner in which all different parties are bringing their strengths to the project so that it is finished in the best possible way. Establishing collaborative partnerships between public service entities or between private sector entities can be truly beneficial, as well as with public sector and private sector entities. For instance, "Collaborative partnerships are non-legal working relationships that often occur between the public and private sectors to meet a common objective or goal. Primarily goodwill gestures, collaborative partnerships are often used to provide knowledge exchange or collective leverage resources for a specified goal" (nascio.org, 2006).

Given the facts, both organizations within the private sector and in the public sector need to learn how to work better with outside contractors and with outside organizations and specialists. At the most foundational level, an organization will only reach stability and keep stability if it has strong group cohesion and team development. However, an organization, be it public or private, won't be able to thrive, blossom and evolve unless it can work well with others, meaning outside contractors. For example, public organizations need to be able to work with one another immediately and seamlessly in times of crisis, rather than having delays and obstacles because they can't figure out how to do this. Thus, based on all these findings, I would naturally explore questions like: what are the best ways to foster coordination and collaboration? What are the best ways to train teams in the process of coordinating and collaborating information? What are some common stumbling blocks that organizations encounter in the task of coordination and collaboration?

Decision-Making

Decision-making in an effective and meaningful way is a common thread of a range of thriving and relevant organizations. "Decision making is the most common task of managers and executives. Successful [organisations] ?outdecide' their competitors in at least three ways: they make better decisions; they make decisions faster; and they implement decisions more? (McLauglin 1995:443)" (Dillon et al., 2010, p.229). This quote aptly demonstrates the absolutely vital role that decision-making has come to play with all organizations which are high-achieving -- regardless of whether or not they are in the public or private sector. Thus, historically, decision-making has been and continues to be an incredibly crucial process for success.

However, it's long been known that decisions are made differently in the public sector vs. In the private sector. "Anecdotal evidence suggests that since public and private sector decision makers operate in different decision making contexts and employ different decision processes, their support needs differ… Results clearly indicate differences in the sectors; particularly in terms of how decisions are structured and how decision makers view the timeliness and relevance of the information they receive" (Dillon et al., 2010, p.230). Research like this demonstrates how decision-makers at these various arenas need different kinds of education and support as a result of the fact that their motivated by different factors and prioritize based on a range of different factors. The more we understand the needs of decision-makers, the better we'll be able to support them and thus they will become more empowered to make informed and wise decisions. Thus, the questions which arise from this are: what are concrete ways to better educate decision-makers? What are the most common motivating factors for decision makers in the private and public sector? How can we best support decision makers in each sector? How can we better understand the multi-faceted decision making process?" (Cellucci, 2008).

Communication Processes

Communication processes are absolutely essential for any successful organization, public or private and they are just as pivotal as effective decision-making. As one expert points out, "If you think about it, there are numerous examples in our professional and private lives where the lack of communication or unclear terminology has created misunderstandings, problems and myriad other issues" (Cellucci, 2008). Communication functions to keep the wheels of public administration spinning as they should be. In fact, one could argue that communication needs to function in the exact same way in public and private organizations. Communication needs to be clear and unmistakable and all parties involved need to feel as though they can raise any issues or concerns that might come up along the way. The research conducted suggests that pertinent questions revolve around themes like: "What are some common breakdowns in communication?" Or "what are some elements that can undermine communication?" along with: "what are some of the traits of effective communication under pressure?"