Buy-in to a Credible Vision! Why Leaders Make Prospector Responses to Learning-Oriented Performance Reform

Abstract

The implementation of learning-oriented performance reforms that seek to replace performance regimes based on external accountability is an important phenomenon. This article examines how leaders respond to such reforms and what factors make leaders pursue a prospector response. The article conceptualizes and examines the phenomenon through a mixed method study in the Danish hospital sector and find that some leaders respond in a prospector way and that reactor responses disappear over time. The key result is that leader buy-in to the vision of learning-oriented performance reform and the perception of higher level commitment to the reform further prospector responses.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1

References

  1. Andrews, R., Boyne, G. A., Law, J., & Walker, R. M. (2011). Strategy implementation and public service performance. Administration and Society, 43(6), 643–671.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Berwick, D. M., Nolan, T. W., & Whittington, J. (2008). The triple aim: care, health, and cost. Health Affairs, 27(3), 759–769.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bevan, G., & Hood, C. (2006). What’s measured is what matters: targets and gaming in the English public health care system. Public Administration, 84(3), 517–538.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Boyne, G. A. (2012). Performance management – does it work? In R. M. Walker, G. A. Boyne, & G. A. Brewer (Eds.), Public management and performance: Research directions (pp. 207–226). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Boyne, G. A., & Walker, R. M. (2004). Strategy content and public service organizations. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 14(2), 231–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Brehm, J., & Gates, S. (1999). Working, shirking, and sabotage: Bureaucratic response to a democratic public (paperback ed.). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Brunsson, N. (2002). The organization of hypocrisy: Talk, decisions and actions in organizations (Vol. 2). Oslo: Abstrakt.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Busse, R., Geissler, A., & Quentin, W. (2011). Diagnosis-related groups in Europe. McGraw-Hill Education; Open University Press - LA English.

  9. Central Denmark Region. (2012). Oplæg til drøftelse. Nye styringsmodeller for aktivitet og økonomi 14-11-2012. Central Denmark Region.

  10. Central Denmark Region. (2014a). Ny styring i et patientperspektiv – præsentation af mål - 27-10-2014. Central Denmark Region.

  11. Central Denmark Region. (2014b). Sagsfremstilling for Regionsrådet – Ny Styring i et patientperspektiv. Central Denmark Region.

  12. Central Denmark Region. (2016). Ny styring i et patientperspektiv, 3. delevaluering, august 2016. Central Denmark Region.

  13. Conner, D. R. (1993). Managing at the speed of change (1st ed.). New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Cots, F., Chiarello, P., Salvador, X., Castells, X., & Quentin, W. (2011). DRG-based hospital payment: Intended and unintended consequences. In R. Busse, A. Geissler, W. Quentin, & M. Wiley (Eds.), Diagnosis-related groups in Europe (pp. 75–92). New York: McGraw-Hill International.

  15. de Vries, M. F. R. K., & Balazs, K. (1999). Transforming the mind-set of the organization: a clinical perspective. Administration and Society, 30(6), 640–675.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Dull, M. (2009). Results-model reform leadership: Questions of credible commitment. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 19(2), 255–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Elmore, R. F. (2000). Building a new structure for school leadership. Washington, DC: Albert Shanker Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Ernst, C., & Chrobot-Mason, D. (2011). Flat world, hard boundaries: how to lead across them. MIT Sloan Management Review, 52(3), 81.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Fernandez, S., & Rainey, H. G. (2006). Managing successful organizational change in the public sector. Public Administration Review, 66(2), 168–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Frey, B. S., & Jegen, R. (2001). Motivation crowding theory. Journal of Economic Surveys, 15(5), 589–611.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Gailmard, S. (2010). Politics, principal-agent problems, and public service motivation. International Public Management Journal, 13(1), 35–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Gerrish, E. (2016). The impact of performance management on performance in public organizations: a meta-analysis. Public Administration Review, 76(1), 48–66. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12433.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Heckman, J. J., Heinrich, P., & Smith, J. (2011). Performance standards and the potential to improve government performance. In J. J. Heckman, P. Heinrich, G. Courty, G. Marschke, & J. Smith (Eds.), The performance of performance standards (pp. 1–14). Kalmazoo: WE Upjohn Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Herscovitch, L., & Meyer, J. P. (2002). Commitment to organizational change: extension of a three-component model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(3), 474–487.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Hood, C. (1991). A public management for all seasons? Public Administration, 69(1), 3–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Jakobsen, M. L., Baekgaard, M., Moynihan, D., & van Loon, N. (2018). Making sense of performance regimes: Rebalancing external accountability and internal learning. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance, 1(2), 127–141.

  27. Jakobsen, M. L., Kjeldsen, A. M., & Pallesen, T. (2017). Loyal agents or saboteurs? Performance increasing policies and public service motivation among hospital workers. In Comparative public management: Why context matters in public administration. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Jan, S. (2003). A perspective on the analysis of credible commitment and myopia in health sector decision making. Health Policy, 63(3), 269–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Jensen, U. T., Andersen, L. B., Bro, L. L., Bøllingtoft, A., Eriksen, T. L. M., Holten, A., & Würtz, A. (2019). Conceptualizing and measuring transformational and transactional leadership. Administration and Society, 51(1), 3–33.

  30. Jespersen, P. K., Nielsen, L.-L. M., & Sognstrup, H. (2002). Professions, institutional dynamics, and new public management in the Danish hospital field. International Journal of Public Administration, 25(12), 1555–1574.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Jones, B. D., & Baumgartner, F. R. (2005). The politics of attention: How government prioritizes problems. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Kerpershoek, E., Groenleer, M., & de Bruijn, H. (2016). Unintended responses to performance management in Dutch hospital care: bringing together the managerial and professional perspectives. Public Management Review, 18(3), 417–436.

  33. Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading change. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

  34. Kroll, A. (2013). The other type of performance information: Nonroutine feedback, its relevance and use. Public Administration Review, 73(2), 265–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Kroll, A. (2015). Explaining the use of performance information by public managers: a planned-behavior approach. The American Review of Public Administration, 45(2), 201–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. May, P. J., & Winter, S. C. (2009). Politicians, managers, and street-level bureaucrats: influences on policy implementation. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 19(3), 453–476.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Mayne, J. (2007). Challenges and lessons in implementing results-based management. Evaluation, 13(1), 87–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Meier, K. J., Rutherford, A., & Avellaneda, C. N. (2017). Comparative public management: Why national, environmental, and organizational context matters. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Mikkelsen, M. F., Jacobsen, C. B., & Andersen, L. B. (2017). Managing employee motivation: exploring the connections between managers’ enforcement actions, employee perceptions, and employee intrinsic motivation. International Public Management Journal, 20(2), 183–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Miles, R. E., & Snow, C. C. (2003). Organizational strategy, structure, and process. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Miller, G. J., & Whitford, A. B. (2007). The principal’s moral hazard: constraints on the use of incentives in hierarchy. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory: J-PART, 17(2), 213–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Moynihan, D. P. (2008). The dynamics of performance management: Constructing information and reform. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Moynihan, D., & Beazley, I. (2016). Toward next-generation performance budgeting: Lessons from the experiences of seven reforming countries. Washington DC: World Bank Publications.

  45. Noordegraaf, M. (2007). From “pure” to “hybrid” professionalism. Present-day professionalism in ambiguous public domains. Administration and Society, 39(6), 761–785.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. North, D. C., & Weingast, B. R. (1989). Constitutions and commitment: the evolution of institutions governing public choice in seventeenth-century England. The Journal of Economic History, 49(4), 803–832.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. OECD. (2014). Recommendation of the council on digital government strategies. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Ordóñez, L. D., Schweitzer, M. E., Galinsky, A. D., & Bazerman, M. H. (2009). Goals gone wild: The systematic side effects of overprescribing goal setting. The Academy of Management Perspectives, 23(1), 6–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Pollitt, C. (2013). The logics of performance management. Evaluation, 19(4), 346–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Pollitt, C., & Bouckaert, G. (2011). Public management reform: A comparative analysis-new public management, governance, and the Neo-Weberian state. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Porter, M. E., & Lee, T. H. (2013). The strategy that will fix health care: providers must lead the way in making value the overarching goal. Harvard Business Review, 91(10), 50.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Ragin, C. C. (1989). The comparative method: Moving beyond qualitative and quantitative strategies (1 paperback printing). Berkeley: University of California Press.

  53. Robinson, M. (2002). Output-purchase funding and budgeting systems in the public sector. Public Budgeting & Finance, 22(4), 17–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Søgaard, R., Kristensen, S. R., & Bech, M. (2015). Incentivizing effort in governance of public hospitals: Development of a delegation-based alternative to activity-based remuneration. Health Policy, 119(8), 1076–1085.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Stone, D. A. (1989). Causal stories and the formation of policy agendas. Political Science Quarterly, 104(2), 281–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Strategisk Sundhedsledelsesforum. (2013). Udskrift af forhandlingsprotokollen for Strategisk Sundhedsledelsesforum. Central Denmark Region.

  57. Suddaby, R., Cooper, D. J., & Greenwood, R. (2007). Transnational regulation of professional services: Governance dynamics of field level organizational change. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 32(4/5), 333–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Talbot, C. (2010). Theories of performance: Organizational and service improvement in the public domain. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mads Leth Jakobsen.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(DOCX 47.4 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jakobsen, M.L. Buy-in to a Credible Vision! Why Leaders Make Prospector Responses to Learning-Oriented Performance Reform. Public Organiz Rev 20, 277–299 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11115-019-00438-4

Download citation

Keywords

  • Learning-oriented performance reforms
  • Leader responses
  • Vision
  • Credibility