¶ … Working, Shirking, and Sabotage: Bureaucratic Response to a Democratic Public, Scott Gates and John O. Brehm examine the factors that influences decisions made by bureaucrats. The authors argue that supervisors are essentially ineffectual in influencing the behaviors and attitudes of street-level bureaucrats. Instead, the decisions of street-level bureaucrats are influenced by their own beliefs, and by the peer pressure exerted by other bureaucrats. This contrasts significantly with earlier principal-agency models used to explain bureaucratic behavior which argued that supervisors significantly influenced bureaucratic behavior. The authors argue that a look at the working lives of bureaucrats is a topical and valuable addition to the literature on the role of government in the United States today. They note that bureaucrats act as important agents for a democratic government, as they perform the lion's share of governmental tasks. As such, the actions of bureaucrats can influence the day-to-day lives of millions of Americans. Understanding the factors that control bureaucratic decisions is crucial to better understanding our government, and may ultimately help predict the behavior of bureaucrats.

Gates and Brehm use a variety of evidence to back up their discussion throughout the book itself. The book is bolstered by the results of surveys, administrative records, and observational studies. Further, the authors provide a useful analysis and understanding of the current theory of bureaucratic...

In other words, Gates and Brehm argue that decisions made by bureaucrats generally consist of three categories of working, shirking, or sabotage. Working is characterized by exerting effort toward accomplishing specific goals of policy. Most often, this work matches the goals of their supervisors. In contrast, shirking occurs when a bureaucrat directs his or her efforts toward goals that are not policy related. Shirking can include working actively towards leisure goals. In the case of sabotage, these bureaucrats move toward accomplishing policy goals that may be in direct conflict with the policy goals of their supervisors.
One of the more interesting concepts tackled within Gates and Brehm's discussion is their focus on the power of the bureaucrat vs. The influence of the supervisor. Traditionally, the authors argue that the leader influences the subordinate bureaucrat through either coercion or through education. However, they argue that bureaucrat's decisions are not influenced strongly by their supervisor's policies and beliefs. This contrasts sharply with some earlier theories that suggested that supervisors were responsible for the actions of their subordinates. Working, Shirking, and Sabotage clearly shows that supervisory ability to guide subordinate actions is significantly limited, although…