Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Public Values and Decision-Making: A Distinction Without a Difference?

  • Reference work entry
  • First Online:
The Palgrave Handbook of the Public Servant

  • 1888 Accesses

Abstract

Discretion is exercised at every level of government by people whose personal values may or may not align with the purposes of their organization. While sometimes overlapping, public and private sector organizations typically serve different purposes, so how are the purposes of organizations affected by the values of the people exercising discretion within then? Would public decisions be different if different people were employed in the public sector? Does public service attract people with different values, and do those values lead to different decisions? Public service motivation (PSM) theory has demonstrated unique motivations for those who seek employment in the public sector, which would suggest that other decisions made by them may be rooted in unique motives and values. Public Values (PV) theory takes the next step in attempting to describe the impact of personally held values on public decision-making.

This chapter explores how public and private sector employees rely on different values when engaging in public decisions. Contrary to some previous assumptions, the evidence is mixed that public employees possess a unique affinity for altruism or other supposedly more public values. Core management values do seem to be shared by employees across sectors. Overall the picture that is emerging bolsters the contention that the activation of public values in decision-making is highly context specific and not amenable to universal classification.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Allison, G.T. 1983. Public and private management: Are they fundamentally alike in all unimportant respects? In Public management, ed. J.L. Perry and K.L. Kramer. Palo Alto: Mayfield Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyne, G.A. 2002. Public and private management: What’s the difference? Journal of Management Studies 39 (1): 97–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bozeman, B. 1987. All organizations are public. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2007. Public values and public interest: Counterbalancing economic individualism. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bozeman, B., and S. Bretschneider. 1994. The “Publicness puzzle” in organization theory: A test of alternative explanations of differences between public and private organizations. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 4 (2): 197–224.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braithwaite, V.A., and W.A. Scott. 1991. Values. In Measures of social psychological attitudes, ed. J.P. Robinson, P.R. Shaver, and L.S. Wrightsman, 661–753. San Diego: Academic.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bryson, J.M., B.C. Crosby, and L. Bloomberg. 2014. Public value governance: Moving beyond traditional public administration and the new public management. Public Administration Review 74 (4): 445–456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buelens, M., and H. Van den Broeck. 2007. An analysis of differences in work motivation between public and private sector organizations. Public Administration Review 67 (1): 65–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crewson, P.E. 1997. Public-service motivation: Building empirical evidence of incidence and effect. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 7 (4): 499–518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahl, R.A. 1947. The science of public administration: Three problems. Public Administration Review 7 (1): 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dewey, J. 1927. The public and its problems: An essay in political inquiry. New York: Holt Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feather, N.T. 1975. Values in education and society. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallie, W.B. 1955. Essentially contested concepts. In Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society (Vol. 56, pp. 167–198). Aristotelian Society, Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodin, R.E. 1979. Retrospective rationality: Saving people from their former selves. Information (International Social Science Council) 18 (6): 967–990.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodsell, C.T. 2003. The case for bureaucracy: A public administration polemic. SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grunig, J.E. 1966. The role of information in economic decision making. Austin: Association for Education in Journalism.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1997. A situational theory of publics: Conceptual history, recent challenges and new research. Public relations research: An international perspective 3: 48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gulick, L. 1937. Science, values and public administration. In Papers on the science of administration, ed. L. Urwick and Luther Gulick, 191–195. Institute of Public Administration.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halman, L., and R. De Moor. 1994. Value shift in Western societies. In The Individualizing Society: Value Change in Europe and North America, 21–36. Tilburg: Tilburg University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, A., Madison, J., and Jay, J. 2008. The Federalist Papers. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hitlin, S., and J.A. Piliavin. 2004. Values: Reviving a dormant concept. Annual Review of Sociology 30 (1): 359–393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horwitz, M.J. 1982. The history of the public/private distinction. University of Pennsylvania Law Review 130 (6): 1423–1428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jørgensen, T.B., and B. Bozeman. 2007. Public values: An inventory. Administration & Society 39 (3): 354–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jørgensen, T.B., and M.R. Rutgers. 2014. Public values: Core or confusion? Introduction to the centrality and puzzlement of public values research. The American Review of Public Administration. 45: 3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karl, K.A., and C.L. Sutton. 1998. Job values in Today’s workforce: A comparison of public and private sector employees. Public Personnel Management 27 (4): 515–527.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kluckhohn, C. 1951. Values and value-orientations in the theory of action: An exploration in definition and classification. In Toward a general theory of action, ed. T. Parsons and E. Schils, 388–433. New York: Harper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krislov, S. 2012. Representative bureaucracy. New Orleans: Quid Pro Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lambsdorff, J.G. 2002. Corruption and rent-seeking. Public Choice 113 (1–2): 97–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Le Grand, J. 2006. Motivation, agency, and public policy: Of knights and knaves, pawns and queens. Oxford: Oxford University Press Catalogue.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, G.B. 1990. In search of the Machiavellian milquetoasts: Comparing attitudes of bureaucrats and ordinary people. Public Administration Review 50 (2): 220–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lynn, L.E. 2001. The myth of the bureaucratic paradigm: What traditional public administration really stood for. Public Administration Review 61 (2): 144–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lyons, S.T., L.E. Duxbury, and C.A. Higgins. 2006. A comparison of the values and commitment of private sector, public sector, and Parapublic sector employees. Public Administration Review 66 (4): 605–618.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meier, K.J. 2015. Proverbs and the evolution of public administration. Public Administration Review 75 (1): 15–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meynhardt, T. 2009. Public value inside: What is public value creation? International Journal of Public Administration 32 (3–4): 192–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, M.H. 1995. Creating public value: Strategic management in government. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moulton, S. 2009. Putting together the publicness puzzle: A framework for realized publicness. Public Administration Review 69 (5): 889–900.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mumby, D.K., and L.L. Putnam. 1992. The politics of emotion: A feminist Reading of bounded rationality. The Academy of Management Review 17 (3): 465–486.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murray, M.A. 1975. Comparing public and private management: An exploratory essay. Public Administration Review 35 (4): 364–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nalbandian, J., and J.T. Edwards. 1983. The values of public administrators: A comparison with lawyers, social workers, and business administrators. Review of Public Personnel Administration 4 (1): 114–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nutt, P.C. 2006. Comparing public and private sector decision-making practices. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 16 (2): 289–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Donnell, G.A. 1998. Horizontal accountability in new democracies. Journal of Democracy 9 (3): 112–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, H.M., and J.L. Perry. 2013. The transformation of governance. The American Review of Public Administration 43 (1): 26–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perry, J.L., and A. Hondeghem. 2008. Motivation in public management: The call of public service: The call of public service. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perry, J.L., and H.G. Rainey. 1988. The public-private distinction in organization theory: A critique and research strategy. The Academy of Management Review 13 (2): 182–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perry, J.L., and L.R. Wise. 1990. The motivational bases of public service. Public Administration Review 50 (3): 367–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rainey, H.G. 1982. Reward preferences among public and private managers: In search of the service ethic. The American Review of Public Administration 16 (4): 288–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2009. Understanding and managing public organizations. Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2014. Understanding and managing public organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rainey, H.G., R.W. Backoff, and C.H. Levine. 1976. Comparing public and private organizations. Public Administration Review 36 (2): 233–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rohan, M.J. 2000. A Rose by any name? The values construct. Personality and Social Psychology Review 4 (3): 255–277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rokeach, M. 1973. The nature of human values. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose-Ackerman, S. 2013. Corruption: A study in political economy. Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rutgers, M.R. 2008. Sorting out public values? On the contingency of value classification in public administration. Administrative Theory & Praxis 30 (1): 92–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sayre, W.S. 1958. Premises of public administration: Past and emerging. Public Administration Review 18 (2): 102–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, S.H. 1992. Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 25 (1): 1–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1994. Are there universal aspects in the structure and contents of human values? Journal of Social Issues 50 (4): 19–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, S. 1996. Value priorities and behavior: Applying a theory of integrated value systems. In The Ontario symposium: The psychology of values, ed. U. Seligman, J. Olson, and M. Zanna, vol. 8. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, S.H. 2005. Basic human values: Their content and structure across countries. In Valores e Comportamento nas Organizações [Values and behaviour in organizations], ed. A. Tamayo and J.B. Porto, 21–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, S. 2007. Value orientations: Measurement, antecedents and consequences across nations. In Measuring attitudes cross-nationally – Lessons from the European Social Survey, ed. R. Jowell, C. Roberts, R. Fizgerals, and G. Eva, 169–203. London: Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, S.H., and A. Bardi. 2001. Value hierarchies across cultures: Taking a similarities perspective. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 32 (3): 268–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, S.H., and W. Bilsky. 1990. Toward a theory of the universal content and structure of values: Extensions and cross-cultural replications. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 58 (5): 878.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, S.H., G. Melech, A. Lehmann, S. Burgess, M. Harris, and V. Owens. 2001. Extending the cross-cultural validity of the theory of basic human values with a different method of measurement. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 32 (5): 519–542.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seitz, S.T. 1978. Bureaucracy, policy, and the public. Saint Louis: CV Mosby Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H.A. 1946. The proverbs of administration. Public Administration Review 6 (1): 53–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, W.M. 1986. Reconstructing public philosophy. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Tetlock, P.E. 1986. A value pluralism model of ideological reasoning. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 50 (4): 819–827.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, D.F. 1993. Mediated corruption: The case of the Keating five. The American Political Science Review 87 (2): 369–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van der Wal, Z., and L. Huberts. 2008. Value solidity in government and business: Results of an empirical study on public and private sector organizational values. The American Review of Public Administration 38 (3): 264–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van der Wal, Z., L. Huberts, H. Van Den Heuvel, and E. Kolthoff. 2006. Central values of government and business: Differences, similarities and conflicts. Public Administration Quarterly 30: 314–364.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Der Wal, Z., G. De Graaf, and K. Lasthuizen. 2008a. What’s valued Most? Similarities and differences between the organizational values of the public and private sector. Public Administration 86 (2): 465–482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Der Wal, Z., A. Pevkur, and K. Vrangbaek. 2008b. Public sector value congruence among old and new EU member-states? Public Integrity 10 (4): 317–333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van der Wal, Z., T. Nabatchi, and G. de Graaf. 2013. From galaxies to universe: A cross-disciplinary review and analysis of public values publications from 1969 to 2012. The American Review of Public Administration. 45: 13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ventriss, C. 2001. A democratic public and administrative thought: A public perspective. In Rethinking administrative theory: The challenge of a new century, ed. J.S. Jun, 93–104. Westport: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vermeulen, M. (2003). Waarden van organisaties in de publieke sector. Een literatuuronderzoek naar relevante waarden voor het functioneren van publieke organisaties en haar medewerkers [Values of organizations in the public sector. A literature study on relevant values for the functioning of public organizations and its employees]. Unpublished Master thesis VU University Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waldo, D. 1952. Development of theory of democratic administration. The American Political Science Review 46 (1): 81–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1984. The administrative state: A study of the political theory of American public administration. New York: Holmes & Meier Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, W. 1887. The study of administration. Political Science Quarterly 2 (2): 197–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Witesman, E.M. 2016. From public values to public value and Back again. Public values consortium. Arizona State University, Center for Organization Research and Design.

    Google Scholar 

  • Witesman, O.F. 2017. Universality in public service values: A methodology for the comparison of value structures and content. Indiana University Doctoral Dissertations.

    Google Scholar 

  • Witesman, E., and Walters, L. 2014. Public service values: A new approach to the study of motivation in the public sphere. Public Administration 92 (2): 375–405.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wittmer, D. 1991. Serving the people or serving for pay: Reward preferences among government, hybrid sector, and business managers. Public Productivity & Management Review 14: 369–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. O’Neill School of Public and Environmental Affairs, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA

    Owen F. Witesman

Authors
  1. Owen F. Witesman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Owen F. Witesman .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia

    Helen Sullivan

  2. Public Service Research Group, University of New South Wales (UNSW), Canberra, ACT, Australia

    Helen Dickinson

  3. Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia

    Hayley Henderson

Section Editor information

  1. Brigham Young University, Provo, USA

    Eva Witesman

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Witesman, O.F. (2021). Public Values and Decision-Making: A Distinction Without a Difference?. In: Sullivan, H., Dickinson, H., Henderson, H. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of the Public Servant. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-29980-4_85

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation