Accountability, Politics, and Power

  • Yousueng HanEmail author
  • Mehmet Akif DemirciogluEmail author
Living reference work entry

Later version available View entry history

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31816-5_2453-1

Synonyms

Definition

Accountability

The fact or condition of being required or expected to justify actions or decisions; responsibility

Politics

The activities associated with the governance of a country or other area, especially the debate or conflict among individuals or parties having or hoping to achieve power; activities within an organization that are aimed at improving someone’s status or position

Power

The ability to do something or act in a particular way; the capacity or ability to direct or influence the behavior of others or the course of events

Introduction

This paper explains the relationships among the concepts of accountability, politics, and power. More specifically, this paper will conceptualize and define accountability, frame accountability in terms of typologies, discuss the relationship between accountability and...

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

References

  1. Behn RD (2001) Rethinking democratic accountability. Brookings Institution Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  2. Brandsma GJ, Schillemans T (2013) The accountability cube: measuring accountability. J Public Adm Res Theory 23(4):953–975CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brinkerhoff DW, Wetterberg A (2015) Gauging the effects of social accountability on services, governance, and citizen empowerment. Public Adm Rev 76(2):274–286Google Scholar
  4. Cummings LL, Anton RJ (1990) The logical and appreciative dimensions of accountability. In: Appreciative management and leadership: the power of positive thought and action in organizations. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, pp 257–286Google Scholar
  5. Day P, Klein R (1987) Accountabilities: five public services, vol 357. Tavistock, LondonGoogle Scholar
  6. Dubnick MJ (2002) Seeking salvation for accountability. Paper read at annual meeting of the American Political Science AssociationGoogle Scholar
  7. Dubnick MJ and George Frederickson H (2009) Accountable agents: federal performance measurement and third-party government. J Public Adm Res Theory vol 20, (Special issue):i1–i17Google Scholar
  8. Dubnick MJ, George Frederickson H (2011) Accountable governance: problems and promises. M.E. Sharpe, ArmonkGoogle Scholar
  9. Ferris GR, Mitchell TR, Canavan PJ, Frink DD, Hopper H (1995) Accountability in human resource systems. In: Rosen SD, Ferris GR, Barnum DT (eds) Handbook of human resource management. Blackwell Publishers, Oxford, pp 175–196Google Scholar
  10. Furlong SR (1998) Political influence on the bureaucracy: the bureaucracy speaks. J Public Adm Res Theory 8(1):39–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gilmour JB, Lewis DE (2006a) Does performance budgeting work? An examination of the office of management and budget’s PART scores. Public Adm Rev 66(5):742–752CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gilmour JB, Lewis DE (2006b) Political appointees and the competence of federal program management. Am Polit Res 34(1):22–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Golden MM (1998) Interest groups in the rule-making process: who participates? Whose voices get heard? J Public Adm Res Theory 8(2):245–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Karsten N (2015) Scrutinize me, please!: The drivers, manifestations and implications of accountability-seeking behavior. Public Adm 93(3):684–699CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Klingner DE, Nalbandian J, Romzek BS (2002) Politics, administration, and markets conflicting expectations and accountability. Am Rev Public Adm 32(2):117–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Koppell JGS (2005) Pathologies of accountability: ICANN and the challenge of “multiple accountabilities disorder”. Public Adm Rev 65(1):94–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lerner JS, Tetlock PE (1999) Accounting for the effects of accountability. Psychol Bull 125(2):255–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lindberg SI (2013) Mapping accountability: core concept and subtypes. Int Rev Adm Sci 79(2):202–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Moynihan DP, Ingraham PW (2003) Look for the silver lining: when performance-based accountability systems work. J Public Adm Res Theory 13(4):469–490CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mulgan R (2003) Holding power to account: accountability in modern democracies. Palgrave Macmillan, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Pfeffer J (1992) Managing with power: politics and influence in organizations. Harvard Business Press, BostonGoogle Scholar
  22. Romzek BS, Dubnick MJ (1987) Accountability in the public sector: lessons from the Challenger tragedy. Public Adm Rev 47(3):227–238Google Scholar
  23. Romzek B, LeRoux K, Johnston J, Kempf RJ, Piatak JS (2014) Informal accountability in multisector service delivery collaborations. J Public Adm Res Theory 24(4):813–842CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Schlenker BR, Britt TW, Pennington J, Murphy R, Doherty K (1994) The triangle model of responsibility. Psychol Rev 101(4):632–652CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. West WF (2005) Neutral competence and political responsiveness: an uneasy relationship. Policy Stud J 33(2):147–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. West WF (2006) Presidential leadership and administrative coordination: examining the theory of a unified executive. Pres Stud Q 36(3):433–456CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Wood BD, Waterman RW (1991) The dynamics of political control of the bureaucracy. Am Polit Sci Rev 85(03):801–828CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Yang K (2011) The Sisyphean Fate of Government-wide performance accountability reforms: federal performance management efforts and employees’ daily work, 2002–2008. Public Perform Manag Rev 35(1):149–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Public and Environmental AffairsIndiana UniversityBloomingtonUSA