Perceptions unfolded: managerial implementation in perception formation

• Date: 13 August 2018
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPSM-09-2017-0237
• Published date: 13 August 2018
• Pages: 710-725
• Author: Caroline Howard Grøn
• Subject Matter: Public policy & environmental management,Politics,Public adminstration & management

Perceptions unfolded:

managerial implementation

in perception formation

Caroline Howard Grøn

Department of Political Science, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark

Abstract

Purpose –The literature so far has shown that perceptions of managerial interventions matter for

motivation and performance. However, how these perceptions are formed and develop over time is less clear.

The purpose of this paper is to fill part of this gap.

Design/methodology/approach –The paper uses a panel case study to investigate how perceptions

of a managerial intervention are formed and developed over time among daycare workers in a

Danish municipality.

Findings –The paper reveals the dynamic nature of preferences and the centrality of the local manager in

perception formation, illustrating that it is not necessarily the implementation style (soft/hard) that is

important as much as the managerial involvement in the initiative.

Practical implications –Whereas managers are still well advised to consider the pros and cons of

a hard vs a soft implementation approach, this paper also underlines the importance of constant managerial

involvement not only to ensure implementation but also to continuously impact the way managerial

interventions are perceived.

Originality/value –The paper adds to the existing knowledge about perception formation by using

a panel case study, hence illustrating the dynamic character of perception formation.

Keywords Crowding out, Managerial implementation, Perception formation

Paper type Research paper

Perceptions matter in public management. A number of existing studies link perceptions of

a managerial intervention to its positive or negative motivational effects (Andersen and

Pallesen, 2008; Frey and Jegen, 2001; Jacobsen et al., 2014; Weibel et al., 2010). In turn,

motivation has been argued to affect employee performance (e.g. Andersen et al., 2014;

Bellé, 2013; Perry and Wise, 1990).

A number of factors have been identified as affecting how perceptions are shaped, including

how local management implements a managerial intervention (Mikkelsen et al., 2015). From the

literature on implementation, it is known that policy design is not over once politicians

have decided on a new policy item (Pressman and Wildavsky, 1973; Sandfort and Moulton,

2014, p. 10). Many acts of managerial intervention come with local room for translation or

adjustment (Radaelli and Sitton-Kent, 2016) as well as room for interpretation and

implementation by street-level bureaucrats (Lipsky, 1980; Brehm and Gates, 2010).

Consequently, similar acts of managerial intervention are perceived very differently by

similar groups of employees (see e.g. Jacobsen et al., 2014). There seems to be an important

room for the local manager when new managerial interventions are implemented, just as the

local manager is instrumental when considering managerial intervention originating at

the local level. The way local managers approach the implementation affects the extent to

which street-level bureaucrats actually implement managerialinitiatives which, in turn, affects

the success of failure of these initiatives in terms of reaching their pre-set goals (Lipsky, 1980,

for a critical role of management in implementation, see Riccucci, 2005).

Studies of the translation of organizational ideas (e.g. Czarniawska and Sevón, 2005;

Røvik, 2007) have shown that the translation of a given idea develops over time.

While cross-sectional or experimental data might be good for determining how

International Journal of Public

Sector Management

Vol. 31 No. 6, 2018

pp. 710-725

© Emerald PublishingLimited

0951-3558

DOI 10.1108/IJPSM-09-2017-0237

Received 12 September 2017

Revised 13 November 2017

Accepted 23 January 2018

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

www.emeraldinsight.com/0951-3558.htm

710

IJPSM

31,6

perceptions are formed by managerial implementation at a given moment in time, a panel

structure allows us to follow the development of perceptions over time as a given

managerial intervention is introduced and put to use. While initial perceptions may be

extremely important and largely frame how future input is perceived, studies have also

shown that such perceptions are changeable and reinterpreted over time (Weick, 2001).

Hence, it seems warranted to view perceptions as developing over time. On this basis, the

paper asks the following research question:

RQ1. How does managerial implementation affect employees’perceptions of managerial

interventions and how do these perceptions develop over time?

The emphasis on the perceptions of managerial intervention stems from the literature on

crowding mechanisms (e.g. Frey and Jegen, 2001). The paper will return to this literature at

length below. This paper aims to contribute to the understanding of perception formation as

an important element in preventing motivation crowding which, in turn, can decrease

performance. Most studies of crowding effects and the perception of managerial

interventions are based on cross-sectional, quantitative data (e.g. Jacobsen et al., 2014) or,

as the studies reported by Weibel et al. (2010), are experimental in character. While these

data are extremely useful, these do not allow us to determine changes over time, the causal

mechanisms at play, or potential dynamics when perceptions are formed. This paper has

chosen a different approach, instead examining how perceptions are formed through a panel

case study improving our knowledge of how perceptions evolve over time and improving

the range of methodologies used in the field.

The paper begins with a discussion of the understanding of perception formation in the

literature thus far. It narrows its scope to the question of managerial implementation and

discusses how it can be conceptualized. Following this, the paper presents a section on

methodology, introducing the panel-structured case study upon which the paper draws.

The data are then analyzed, conclusions drawn, and the findings discussed.

The importance of perceptions: state of the art

Perceptions of managerial interventions matter, because perceiving a managerial initiative

as “controlling”rather than “supportive”can result in motivational crowding out (e.g.

Jacobsen et al., 2014). To get to this point, the following section introduces some of the

arguments regarding motivational crowding.

Motivational crowding has been explained in a number of ways. Le Grand (2003)

provided an explanation based on the individual’s need to make a sacrifice. Frey (1997)

addressed the question differently, pointing out the existence of both extrinsic and

intrinsic motivation as an unstable situation from which individuals will shy away (p. 91).

Together with Jegen in 2001, however, Frey presented an alternative explanation drawing

on self-determination theory, an approach he had pursued earlier together with Osterloh

(Osterloh and Frey, 2000). Here, crowding out is argued to appear when extrinsic rewards

are perceived as controlling rather than supportive (Frey and Jegen, 2001). The perception

is often arguedto be formed according to the extent to whichthe intervention supports the

three basic psychological needs as defined by self-determination theory (Gagné and

Deci, 2005; see also discussion by Langbein, 2010): the need for autonomy, the need for

competence, and the need for relatedness. In cases where managerial intervention

supports these factors, it will be perceived as supporting. In cases where managerial

intervention undermines these basic psychological needs, it will be perceived as

controlling, leading to a potential crowding out of motivation (Frey and Jegen, 2001,

p. 594). Frey and Jegen also underlined the importance of the employees’self-esteem.

Managerial systems that fail to acknowledge employee motivation risk damaging their

self-esteem, resulting in crowding out.

711

Managerial

implementation