News
Professor Xuejun Wang published a Paper in Administration & Society
Administration & Society, the top journal in public administration has published online the English paper of Professor Xuejun Wang of School of Management / China Research Center for Government Performance Management, Lanzhou University and his postgraduate student, Ziqi Wang, Beyond Efficiency or Justice: The Structure and Measurement of Public Servants’ Public Values Preferences, which using the survey data from Chinese public servants, for the first time systematically developed the measurement structure and scale of public servants' public values preferences (PVPs). This is the fifth paper published in Administration & Society by Chinese mainland scholars as the first author and corresponding author since its founding in 1969 and the second paper published in the journal by Professor BAO Guoxian's team. It marks that the research results of Lanzhou University's government performance management team have been further recognized by the international public administration community.
The study indicates that the public spirit and values recognition held by public servants will become important internal incentives for performance, and the public values preferences of public servants play an increasingly important role in understanding their administrative behaviors in the era of public value management. Researchers, however, tend to choose proxy or simplified variables, e.g. efficiency or fairness to measure public values preferences, resulting in incomplete understanding of the underlying structure. Based on survey data in China, the study develops a five-dimensional scale of public servants’ public values preferences and verifies the scale’s predictive validity by adopting public service motivation and work performance as the criteria. From this study, the authors call for the establishment of a public values-based public personnel management system.
The study follows the standard steps of scale development. First, based on literature review, it defines public values preference as a measurable and relatively stable cognition guiding individuals to engage in public actions, make decisions on shared interests, or manage their relationships with other actors in both public sphere and a governance network. These measurable cognitions help public servants judge which values are more important than others in public affairs. Under the influence of Confucianism, public values preferences of Chinese public servants inevitably have their unique contents which are different from those of the western world. So the PVPs items pool is formed from semi-structured interviews and open questionnaires in Chinese context. Second, through exploratory factor analysis, the study finds that PVPs have a five-dimensional oblique structure which include Virtue PVPs, Authoritarian PVPs, Transformational PVPs, Institutional PVPs and Civil PVPs. and also, the result of confirmatory factor analysis verifies the reliability and validity of the five-dimensional 22-item scale. Last, selecting work performance and public service motivation as criterion, the study proves that the scale has good criterion-related validity and the measurement is not affected by social desirability.
The study has important significance for understanding and measuring PVPs. At the same time, the research results have a strong reference value for public personnel management. Based on research process and results, the authors call for the establishment of a “values-based public personnel management system.” First, with the increasing complexity of values structures, the values preferences structure formed from early public administration theory turns out to be less functional for explaining current practice. Therefore, public personnel managers should reconstruct a dynamic and falsifiable conceptualization of the values structure from situational evidence. Second, although a single scale cannot measure all conflicting values, it is dangerous for public personnel managers to give up values preferences measurement, or use simplified proxy variables to measure conflicting values. Perhaps, a situation-dependent high-order measure can be used to help form appropriate values management strategies. Third, when selecting, training, evaluating, and motivating civil servants, PSM or other noble qualities are not all that public personnel managers should consider. The match between individual PVPs and organizational public values also affect the performance of civil servants, and should receive sufficient attention from practitioners. Finally, the paper points out that it is critical that all values-based public personnel management should be evidence-based and situation-dependent at the same time, for the structure and contents of PVPs would vary across cultures, regime types, and agency/task responsibilities.
Click the link to view the article: https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399719843658
[Administration & Society]
Founded in 1969, the Administration & Society is currently published by SAGE and enjoys high reputation in public administration theory and public organization research. It seeks to further the understanding of public and human service organizations, their administrative processes, and their effect on society. The journal publishes empirically oriented research reports and theoretically specific articles that synthesize or contribute to the advancement of understanding and explanation in these fields. For 40 years, Administration & Society has served as a leading forum for the exchange of ideas and information on current topics, research questions, and philosophical dilemmas of interest to academics in public administration and related disciplines.
