Extending upper echelon theory to top managers’ characteristics, management practice, and quality of public service in local government

ABSTRACT

Using survey and secondary data from Korean local public institutions, we tested the effects of top managers’ characteristics on the quality of public service (QoPS) provided by local public institutions through top managers’ internal and external management practices, based on the upper echelon theory. We found that the greater the top managers’ expertise, the higher the QoPS. Furthermore, we found that top managers’ internal management practices that involve communicating with employees to improve their well-being, resolve their complaints, motivate them, and increase their self-development all mediated the positive relationship between top managers and QoPS. These findings emphasise the importance of top managers’ individual characteristics (e.g., experienced expertise) and internal management practices in achieving public service of high quality in local government.

KEYWORDS:

• Management practice
• quality of public service
• top managers’ characteristics
• upper echelon theory

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes

1. Our research focused on the mediating effect of top managers’ management practices on the relationship between their characteristics and organisational performance, rather than the moderating effect. It aimed to explain the characteristics that can influence management practices and, ultimately, organisational performance.

2. http://www.cleaneye.go.kr/.

3. The term of office for top managers in local public institutions is three years in Korea.

4. One limitation could be that we measured IMP, EMP, and QoPS subjectively to assess invisible management practices and municipally owned corporations (Voorn, Van Genugten, and Van Thiel 2020).

5. How much do you think top managers of your organisation try to communicate with their subordinates compared to top managers of other organisations? How much, in your opinion, do the top managers do to improve the welfare of their subordinates, compared to the top managers of other organisations? How hard do you think the top managers of your organisation work to resolve their subordinates’ complaints, as compared to the top managers of other organisations? How much do you think the top managers of your organisation do to motivate their subordinates, as compared to the top managers of other organisations? How much do you think the top managers of your organisation do for the self-development of their subordinates, as compared to the top managers of other organisations? 1= No effort; 2 = Little effort; 3 = Similar; 4 = Some effort; or 5 = Strong effort.

6. How do top managers of your organisation relate to customers? How do top managers of your organisation relate to citizens? How do top managers of your organisation relate to private institutions officials? How do top managers of your organisation relate to public institution officials? How do top managers of your organisation relate to control officials? How do top managers of your organisation relate to other government officials? How do top managers of your organisation relate to politicians? 1 = Not good at all; 2 = Not good; 3 = Medium; 4 = Good; or 5 = Very good.

7. How is your organisation’s quality of public service, as compared to other organisations? 1= Very low; 2 = Low; 3 = Similar; 4 = High; or 5 = Very high. How is your organisation’s development of new services, as compared to other organisations? 1= Not successful at all; 2 = Relatively unsuccessful; 3 = Similar; 4 = Relatively successful; or 5 = Very successful. How satisfied are citizens with the public services offered by your organisation, as compared with other organisations? 1 = Very low; 2 = Low; 3 = Similar; 4 = High; or 5 = Very high. Does your organisation respond faster to citizens’ needs than other organisations? 1 = Not at all; 2 = Not much; 3 = Same; 4 = Slightly faster; or 5 = Much faster.

Additional information

Funding

This research was supported by the Center for Organizational Diagnosis and Evaluation Research(CODE), Graduate School of Public Administration(GSPA), Seoul National University (SNU).

Notes on contributors

Jungin Kim

Jungin Kim is an associate professor in the Department of Public Administration at the University of Suwon, Republic of Korea. She is interested in human resource management, organisational behaviours, and local governance. She has published in journals including the Public Administration Review, Local Government Studies, and Public Personnel Management.