فهم پاسخ‏گویی غیررسمی مدیران دولتی در شبکه‎های بین‎سازمانی (مطالعه موردی: شورای برنامه‎ریزی و توسعه استان زنجان)

نوع مقاله: مقاله علمی پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استادیار، گروه مدیریت دولتی، دانشکده مدیریت و حسابداری دانشگاه تهران، پردیس فارابی، قم، ایران

2 استادیار، گروه کسب‎وکار، دانشکده مدیریت و حسابداری دانشگاه تهران،پردیس فارابی،قم، ایران

3 استادیار، گروه کسب‎وکار، دانشکده مدیریت و حسابداری دانشگاه تهران، پردیس فارابی، قم،ایران

4 دانشجوی دکتری، گروه مدیریت دولتی، دانشگاه تهران، پردیس فارابی، قم، ایران

چکیده

هدف: هدف اصلی این پژوهش، فهم پاسخ‏گویی غیررسمی مدیران دولتی در شبکه بین سازمان‌های دولتی است؛ به بیان ساده‎تر، هنجارها، انتظارها، تعامل‎های غیررسمی و رفتارهای بین‌شخصی میان مدیران دولتی ایران، چگونه به‎صورت پاسخ‏گویی غیررسمی آشکار می‎شوند؟
روش: این پژوهش بر اساس پارادایم تفسیرگرایی، رویکرد کیفی و استراتژی مطالعه موردی اجرا شده است. شورای برنامه‌ریزی و توسعه استان زنجان برای مورد مطالعه مدنظر قرار گرفت و به روش نمونه‌گیری گلوله ‌برفی با 22 نفر از مدیران دولتی مصاحبه‌های عمیق برگزار شد. داده‏ها با استفاده از روش تحلیل محتوای کیفی در نرم‎افزار مکس‏کیودا تحلیل شده‎اند.
یافته‎ها: این پژوهش نشان داد که پاسخ‏گویی غیررسمی در تعامل‎های غیررسمی و در قالب فعالیت‎های اختیاری اعضای شورا نمایان می‏شود. منافع فردی، خدمتگزاری به مردم، اخلاق و ارزش‏ها، شخصیت و سبک رهبری مدیران و متغیرهای زمینه­ای، عواملی هستند که بر مدیریت مؤثر تعامل‎های غیررسمی اثر می­گذارند. اعضای شورا تلاش می‌کنند که در تعامل‎های غیررسمی، یکدیگر را در قبال هنجارها و قوانین نانوشته، پاسخ‏گو نگه دارند و تنها ابزار آنها برای تحقق این مهم، فشارها و حمایت‌هایی است که نسبت به یکدیگر اعمال می‌کنند.
نتیجه‎گیری: پژوهش حاضر چارچوب نظری ارائه شده توسط رامزک و همکارانش (2012 و 2013) دربارۀ پاسخ‏گویی غیررسمی در شبکه بین سازمان­های غیرانتفاعی را به بخش عمومی و بین مدیران میانی توسعه داد و مشخص شد که ناکارآمدی نظام اداری، سیستم نامناسب انتخاب و انتصاب مدیران و فشارهای مقامات سیاسی، از دغدغه‎های بسیار مهم و به اشتراک­گذاری اطلاعات و فرهنگ قانون‎مداری، فرصت­های مهم پیش­روی مدیران دولتی در پاسخ‏گویی غیررسمی هستند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Understanding Informal Accountability of Governmental Managers in Inter-Organizational Networks: A Case Study in Planning and Development Council of Zanjan Province

نویسندگان [English]

  • Azam Mirzamani 1
  • Mohammad Hossin Rahmati 2
  • Hamid Reza Yazdani 3
  • Mohammad Moradi 4
1 Assistant Prof., Department of Public Administration, Faculty of Management and Accounting, University of Tehran, Farabi Campus, Qum, Iran
2 Assistant Prof., Department of Business Management, Faculty of Management and Accounting, University of Tehran, Farabi Campus, Qum, Iran
3 Assistant Prof., Department of Business Management, Faculty of Management and Accounting, University of Tehran, Farabi Campus, Qum, Iran
4 Ph.D. Candidate, Department of Public Administration, University of Tehran, Farabi Campus, Qum, Iran.
چکیده [English]

Objective:The main purpose of this study was to understand the informal accountability of governmental executives in inter-organizational network i.e. to understand how norms, expectations, informal interactions and interpersonal behaviors among Iranian governmental executives reveal themselves as informal accountability?
Methods: The present research is a case study based on interpretativism using qualitative approach. The planning and development council of Zanjan province was selected as the case to study. Then, based on snowball sampling and to collect data, in-depth interviews with a sample of 22 government executives were conducted. Qualitative content analysis through MAXQDA software was used to analyze the data.
Results: This research showed that informal accountability can be elicited within informal interactions through discretionary activities of council members. Individual interests, being beneficent to people, ethics and values, personality and leadership style of managers, and background variables are factors influencing the effective management of informal interactions. Council members are trying to keep each other accountable for unwritten norms and laws during the course of informal interactions, and their only means of enforcing this issue are the pressure and support that they apply to each other.
Conclusion: The present research extended the theoretical framework provided by Ramesz et al. (2012, 2013) on informal accountability in the network between private organizations and the public sector and among intermediate managers. This study also identified the ineffectiveness of the administrative system, the inappropriate selection system and appointment of managers and the pressures of political officials as the most important challenges, and the sharing of information and regulatory culture as the most important opportunities for governmental executives to take on informal accountability

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Inter-Organizational Networks
  • Informal communications and interactions
  • Unwritten norms or rules
  • Accountability of public managers
  • Informal accountability
اسحق‌زاده، نیره؛ مهرگان، محمدرضا؛ ابویی اردکان، محمد (1396). کاربرد نظریة اتوپایسیس در مدیریت. فصلنامه مدیریت دولتی، 9 (3)، 427- 462.

رهنورد، فرج‏اله؛ محبی‏دلیگانی، مرضیه (1395). آثار جهانی شدن بر مدیریت دولتی در ایران. فصلنامه مدیریت دولتی، 8 (3)، 415- 436.

صفری‏دشتکی، محمد؛ زارع، رضا؛ نیک‏بخش، محمدعلی (1397). تبیین عوامل ساختاری مؤثر بر شکل‏گیری شبکه‏های خط‏مشی (مطالعه موردی: نظام کارآفرینی ایران). فصلنامه مدیریت دولتی، 10 (1)، 109-136.

واعظی، سیّدکمال؛ رهبر، رضا (1395). بررسی اهمیت میانجی مؤلفه احساس بی‏قدرتی در میزان تأثیر ادراک از پاسخ‏گویی بر رفتار مشارکتی دانشجویان (مطالعه موردی: دانشجویان دانشگاه تهران). فصلنامه مدیریت دولتی، 8 (1)، 113- 136.

 

References

Andrè, R., (2010). Assessing the accountability of government-sponsored enterprises and quangos. Journal of Business Ethics, 97(2), 271–289.

Andreaus, M. & Costa, E. (2014). Toward an Integrated Accountability Model for Nonprofit Organizations" In . Published online. Accountability and Social Accounting for Social and Non-Profit Organizations Advances in Public Interest Accounting, 17, 153-176.

Aung, M., Bahramirad, S., Burga, R., Hayhoe, M., Huang, S. & LeBlanc, J., (2017). Sense-making Accountability: Netnographic Study of an Online Public Perspective. Social and Environmental Accountability Journal, 37(1), 1-15.

Aziza Abd Aziz, M., Rahman, H. A., Alam, M. M. & Said, J. (2015). Enhancement of the Accountability of Public Sectors through Integrity System, Internal Control System and Leadership Practices: A Review Study. Procedia Economics and Finance, 28, 163-169.

Barberis, P. (2002). The new public management and a new accountability. Public Administration, 76(3), 451–470.

Behn, R. (2001). Rethinking Democratic Accountability. Washington: Brookings Institution.

Bovens, M., Schillemans, T. & Goodin, R. E., (2014). The Oxford Handbook of Public accountability. First ed. New York: Oxford University Press.

Bryson, J. M., Crosby, B. C. & Bloomberg, L. (2014). Public Value Governance: Moving beyond Traditional Public Administration and the New Public Management. Public Administration Review ,74(4), 445–456.

Cole, D. H. (2017). Laws, norms, and the Institutional Analysis and Development framework. Journal of Institutional Economics, 13(4), 829-847.

Crawford, L. H. & Helm, J. (2009). Government and governance: The value of project management in the public sector. Project Management Journal, 40(1), 73-87.

Davis, T. W. D., Macdonald, K. & Brenton, S. (2012). Reforming accountability in international NGOs- making sense of conflicting feedback. Development in Practice, 22(7).

Day, P. & Klein, R., (1987). Accountabilities: Five Public Services. London: Tavistock.

Dealy, M. D. & Thomas, A. R., (2007). Managing by Accountability: What Every Leader Needs to Know about Responsibility, Integrity and Results. First ed. United States of America: Praeger Publishers.

Denhardt, J. V. & Denhardt, R. B., (2007). The New Public Service. Expanded ed. ed. New York: M.E. Sharpe, Inc..

Donahue, J. D. & Nye, J. S., (2003). For the People: Can We Fix Public Service?. Washington, D. C.: Broking Institution Press.

Donahue, J. D. & Zeckhauser. R. J. (2011). Collaborative governance: private roles for public goals in turbulent times. Princeton University Press, 41 William Street, Princeton, New Jersey 08540.

Eshaghzadeh, N., Mehregan, M. R. & Aboui Ardakan, M., (2017). Application of Autopoietic Theory in Management. Journal of Public Administration, 9(3), 427-462. (in Persian)

Gaikwad, P., (2017). Including Rigor and Artistry in Case Study as a Strategic Qualitative Methodology. The Qualitative Report, 22(13), 3431-3446.

Jeong, B. & Kearns, K. (2015). Accountability in Korean NPOs: Perceptions and Strategies of NPO Leaders. Voluntas- International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 26(5), 1-27.

Kearns, K. P. (1994). The Strategic Management of Accountability in Nonprofit Organizations- An Analytical Framework. Public Administration Review, 54(2), 185-192.

Kearns, K. P. (1996). Managing for accountability: Preserving the public trust in public and nonprofit. 1st ed. ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Kearns, K. P. (1998). Institutional accountability in higher education: A strategic approach. Public Productivity & Management Review, 22(2), 140-156.

Kohlbacher, F. (2006). The Use of Qualitative Content Analysis in Case Study Research. Forum Qualitative Social Research, 7(1), 1-24.

Lavarenne, J., Shwageraus, E. & Weightman, M. (2016). Accountability feedback assessments for improving efficiency of nuclear regulatory institutions. Energy Policy, 96, 274-288.

Mulgan, R. (2000). Comparing accountability in the public and private sectors. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 59(1), 87–97.

Mulgan, R. (2003). Holding Power to Account: Accountability in Modern Democracies. 1st ed. ed. United Kingdom: Palgrave Macmillan.

Oliver, D. (1991). Government in the United Kingdom: the Search for Accountability, Effectiveness and Citizenship. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.

Ostrom, E. (2005). Understanding Institutional Diversity. Princeton, United States of America: Princeton University Press.

Ostrom, E. (2010). Analyzing collective action. International Association of Agricultural Economists, 41(1), 155-166.

Polidano, C. (1998). Why bureaucrats can’t always do what ministers want: multiple accountabilities in Westminister democracies. Public Policy and Administration, 13(1), 35–50.

Rahnavard, F. & Mohebi Deligani, M. (2016). The Effects of Globalization on Public Administration in Iran. Journal of Public Administration, 8(3), 415-436. (in Persian)

Roberts, N. C. (2002). Keeping Public Officials Accountable through Dialogue: Resolving the Accountability Paradox. Public Administration Review, 62(6), 658-669.

Romzek, B., LeRoux, K., Johnston, J., Blackmar, J., Kempf, R., Schede, J., (2011). Informal Accountability Dynamics within Service Delivery Networks. 11th National Public Management Research Conference, June 2-4th, Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs, Syracuse, New York.

Romzek, B., LeRoux, K., Johnston, J., Kempf, R., Schede, J. (2013). Informal Accountability in Multisector Service Delivery Collaborations. Public Administration Research and Theory, 24(4), 813-842.

Romzek, B. S., (2000). Dynamics of Public Sector Accountability in an Era of Reform. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 66(1), 21-44.

Romzek, B. S., Blackmar, J. M. & LeRoux, K. (2012). A Preliminary Th eory of Informal Accountability among Network Organizational Actors. Public Administration Review, 72(3), 442-453.

Romzek, B. S. & Dubnick, M. J. (1987). Accountability in the Public Sector- Lessons from the Challenger Tragedy. Public Administration Review, 47(3), 227-238.

Romzek, B. S., LeRoux, K. & Blackmar, J. M. (2009). The Dynamics of Informal Accountability in Networks of Service Providers. Presented at the 10th National Public Management Research Conference, John Glenn School of Public Affairs, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, Oct. 1-3.

Safari Dashtaki, M., Zare, R., & Nikbakhsh, M.A. (2018). Explaining the Structural Factors Influencing the Formation of Policy Networks; (A Survey on Iranian Entrepreneurship System). Journal of Public Administration, 10(1), 109 – 136. (in Persian)

Scott, C., (2000). Accountability in the Regulatory State. Journal of Law and Society, 27(1), 38-60.

Sinclair, A. (1995). The chameleon of accountability: forms and discourses. Accounting Organizations and Society, 20(2), 219–237.

Stone, B. (1995). Administrative accountability in the ‘Westminster’ democracies: towards a new conceptual framework. Governance: An lntmational Journal of Policy and Administration, 8(4), 505-526.

Urbanovič, J. & Tauginienė, L. (2013). Institutional Responsibility vs Individual Responsibility: Ethical Issues in the Management of Research Performance. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 81, 72-78.

Vaezi, S. K. & Rahbar, R. (2016). Investigating the Mediating Importance of the Impact of Impotence on the Impact of Perception of Accountability on Student Participatory Behavior (Case Study: Tehran University Students). Journal of Public Administration, 8(1), 113-136. (in Persian)

Willems, T. & Van Dooren, W. (2011). Lost in diffusion? How collaborative arrangements lead to an accountability paradox. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 77(3), 505-530.

Yin, R. K. (2003). Case Study Research: Design and Methods. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications.

Yin, R. K. (2009). Case Study Research: Design and Methods. 4th ed. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications.

Yin, R. K. (2014). Case Study Research: Design and Method. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.

Zhang, N. (2017). Institutions, Norms, and Accountability: A Corruption Experiment with Northern and Southern Italians. Journal of Experimental Political Science, 5(1), 1-15.