Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
use their discretions. They may employ individual discretions as a way to sim-
plify their own tasks and/or to handle ambiguous policies. Although almost
every aspect of operational work relies on multiple rules and instructions, the
extent to which all these rules are applied depends on the ability of supervisors
of operational staff to enforce those rules (Lipsky, 1980). However, in practice,
even this direct link from operational staff to supervisors has little constraining
influence over operational staff decisions and actions (Brehm, Gates, & Gomez,
2003).
Conversely, operational staff could seek discretionary space when acting as
engaged advocates for their deserving clients. At some occasions, certain staff mem-
bers engage in an ad hoc relation with customers and clients, outside the hierarchy
and administrative procedures of the organization. The relation with the external
environment is thus based more on personal acquaintance and may even be based
on personal sympathies:
A defining characteristic of street-level work and what distinguishes
it from other work at the bottom of bureaucracies is the street-level
worker's direct contact with citizens. Unlike elected and other top
government officials they do not see citizens as abstractions but as
individuals: as clients, students, criminals, suspects, victims and
so on. Their relationships with these various citizen clients are per-
sonal and emotional, rarely cold and rational. (Maynard-Moody &
Musheno, 2000)
As a result of this personal relation, they may favor the specific client's interest.
The emergence of such a relation and associated discretionary favoring may be espe-
cially reenforced when staff members feel curtailed by far-reaching automization
of their tasks. As Snellen and Van de Donk (2002) noted, “The technostructure
confines their decision space. Their jobs tend to be downgraded.” The effect may be
contrary to the first mentioned type of discretion. Rather than reaching to discre-
tions that simplify the execution of a multitude of tasks, discretions arise in this
case to enrich the tasks with more content and meaning.
In sum, in the execution of discretion, there are two major types to satisfy per-
sonal task motivation:
1. Discretions that simplify tasks
2. Discretions that enrich the tasks
Combining this dichotomy of autonomous/self-interest versus joint/external
interests with the types of discretions at different levels leads to six possible dis-
cretions, as shown in Table 9.1. Discretions aimed at self-interest can be labeled
“autonomous” discretions, and discretions aimed at supporting joint or external
interests can be labeled “joint” discretions.
Search WWH ::
Custom Search