53 Full

International Review of Administrative Sciences
http://ras.sagepub.com/ Public service motivation and organizational performance in Swiss federal government
Adrian Ritz International Review of Administrative Sciences 2009 75: 53 DOI: 10.1177/0020852308099506 The online version of this article can be found at: http://ras.sagepub.com/content/75/1/53
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
On behalf of:
International Institute of Administrative Sciences
Additional services and information for International Review of Administrative Sciences can be found at: Email Alerts: http://ras.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://ras.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav Citations: http://ras.sagepub.com/content/75/1/53.refs.html
Downloaded from ras.sagepub.com at National School of Political on January 17, 2013
>> Version of Record - Mar 9, 2009 What is This?
International Review of Administrative Sciences

Public service motivation and organizational performance in Swiss federal government Adrian Ritz
Abstract During the last 20 years public sector reforms focused on the increase of organizational performance mainly by implementing managerial tools and methods. The one-sided, output-oriented reforms meet with criticism. In our study we focus on the links between employee attitudes, managerial measures, institutional factors and organizational performance. Therefore, three attitudinal constructs, public service motivation, organizational commitment and job satisfaction, are analysed. The study empirically tests the effects of these dimensions on perceived performance in the federal administration of Switzerland. The analysed data of 13,532 federal employees give insight into the importance of employee commitment to the public interest and the need for goal-oriented management techniques. The results are discussed in light of previous studies. Points for practitioners Public administration research raises more and more criticism against New Public Management reforms. This study, however, shows that there is an important link between managerial techniques and the individual perception of organizational performance in administrative practice. There are a range of private management tools immigrating into the public sector. But for the tools to be effective, practitioners need to integrate them with consideration of the specific requirements of the employees commitment to the public interest. Keywords: efficiency, job satisfaction, leadership, management by objectives, organizational commitment, performance, public sector reform, public service motivation
Adrian Ritz is Assistant Professor of Public Administration at the Centre of Competence for Public Management at the University of Bern, Switzerland.
Copyright 2009 IIAS, SAGE Publications (Los Angeles, London, New Delhi and Singapore) Vol 75(1):5378 [DOI:10.1177/0020852308099506]
54 International Review of Administrative Sciences 75(1)
1. Introduction
Over the past two or three decades, management reforms have once again challenged public administration; and with their demand for more performance-based public institutions, they have shaped both the academic discussion and the reforms in public organizations. Others call the present times the era of government by performance management (Moynihan and Pandey, 2005: 421). The managerialistic reform measures change the institutional framework within public employees work. That raises important questions about public employees motivation and commitment in relation to the proclaimed performance culture. Is there a fundamental change happening in the values of public employees? Do sophisticated performance and incentives regimes crowd out public service motivation (PSM) (Perry and Wise, 1990; Frey and Jegen, 2001)? Or do higher motivation and the commitment of public employees raise awareness of efficiency and effectiveness in public task fulfilment, as Moynihan and Pandey (2007: 41) argue: PSM is important not just to motivation but also to productivity, improved management practices, accountability, and trust in government . . .? The latter issue is at the heart of this article. It adds highly relevant knowledge to the recent efforts towards understanding the role of public service motivation, commitment and performance in public administration research. The article is important, both theoretically and practically, because it helps explain the area of conflict between management techniques and incentive systems as well as the public interest for managing government institutions. During recent years there has been increasing study of the question whether a specific motivation of public employees exists. Moreover, the theoretical works of James L. Perry have been supplemented by several empirical studies. Whereas up to now studies on the existence and causes of the influencing factors on PSM have dominated, research on the effects of PSM will become more and more important (Brewer et al., 2000; Camilleri, 2007; Moynihan and Pandey, 2007). But research on PSM remains largely silent about the effects of PSM on performance, and empirical work focusing on this issue is rare (Kim, 2005; Bogh Andersen and Pallesen, 2008; Park and Rainey, 2008). The relationship between public service motivation and performance is a matter of great interest to scholars and practitioners alike (Brewer, 2008: 136). This article intends to close this gap: the study tests different hypotheses concerning the effects of PSM and other attitudinal or institutional dimensions on organizational performance. Prior mostly theoretical research is extended by empirical results from Switzerland and new perspectives on the relationship between motivation, leadership behaviour and performance. The article is structured as follows: section two discusses the construct of public service motivation (PSM). Section three examines the question to what extent individual-level factors like PSM and organizational commitment (OC) affect organizational performance. At this point, the article addresses the basic challenge of several authors (Perry and Wise, 1990; Brewer, 2008), which calls for a more in-depth study of the correlation between PSM and OC. In section four, the relationship between institutional, non-attitudinal factors and performance is investigated. Section five introduces the empirical part of the study by describing the methodology and
Ritz Public service motivation in Switzerland 55
dataset. In section six we then set forth the empirical part by testing the hypotheses of sections three and four and discussing the results. The last section outlines the main results and their implications for practice.
2. Public service motivation

The concept of PSM assumes that there are specific motives that are activated particularly by the features of public institutions. Motivation arises from the interplay between the person, or the persons permanent motives, and the situation (Von Rosenstiel, 2007). Aspects of situations, such as the institutional framework per se, become incentives for the individual to the extent that they activate specific motives in the person and guide his or her behaviour in a specific direction. Perry and Wise (1990: 68) established the PSM concept and described PSM as . . . an individuals predisposition to respond to motives grounded primarily or uniquely in public institutions and organisations. Based upon this concept, Perry (1996) developed a measurement process which measures PSM directly using the four following categories: attraction to public policy-making, commitment to the public interest, compassion and self-sacrifice. Research on PSM can be classified into three basic categories: first, the exploration and explanation of the PSM construct; second, the distinction between employees PSM in the public and private sectors; and third, the international comparison of the PSM construct. The exploration of PSM shows the existence of various aspects of PSM within one and the same individual (Brewer et al., 2000). Other studies are rather critical in their comments about the allocation of Perrys motives to individuals (Gabris and Simo, 1995; Alonso and Lewis, 2001). Following Moynihan and Pandey (2007), organizational factors like the reduction of hierarchy, red tape and goal clarity have a positive effect on PSM. Concerning the sector-specific differentiation of PSM, several studies confirm the hypothesis that public employees value monetary incentives less compared to private sector employees and furthermore show that PSM in public organizations is different from that in private organizations, specifically that it is stronger in public institutions and that job productivity of public service-motivated employees is higher than that of extrinsically oriented employees (Rainey, 1979, 1982; Crewson, 1997; Houston, 2000; Buelens and Van den Broeck, 2007). However, Gabris und Simo (1995) are sceptical about this hypothesis. Although they did not apply Perrys PSM dimensions, they found no differences between the motives of employees in the public and private sectors. PSM includes different values that exist not only in American administrations, but also characterize the ethos of public officials in various public service regimes and national cultures (Horton and Hondeghem, 2006; Meyer and Hammerschmid, 2006; Horton, 2008). More recent research examines additional value categories of PSM and points to the significance of institutional and cultural influences on the formation of PSM (Horton, 2006; Vandenabeele et al., 2006; Vandenabeele, 2007; Perry and Vandenabeele, 2008; Vandenabeele and Van der Walle, 2008). An important difference between Switzerland and other European countries like France, Germany, Austria or Italy is the non-existence of a public service corps. Life-long tenure does not exist for public employees except for judges. There is no special training for public officials as the Ecole National dAdministration in France or the University of Administrative Sciences in Speyer, Germany. Public administration
education like MPAs for regular students did not exist until 2006. These characteristics of Swiss administrative culture and the very decentralized and federal politico-administrative system show specific characteristics of Switzerlands administrative systems and its educational base. But in light of the empirical results they dont question the existence of Perrys PSM dimension in the Swiss context.
3. Motivation, attitudes and performance

For the present study, the correlation between PSM, OC and the performance of public organizations is of particular interest. Work motivation is often categorized into the two types of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, showing that different incentives have a distinct impact on employee motivation. Whereas intrinsic motivation is nurtured by rewards as the activity itself, the source of extrinsic motivation are external controlling variables as explicit rewards (e.g. money, threat) (Herzberg, 1966; Cameron and Pierce, 2002). From the perspective of self-determination theory, intrinsic motivation is increased in more autonomous work situations and results in more positive attitudinal and behavioural outcomes (Deci and Ryan, 1985; Ryan and Connell, 1989). Against this background Freys (1997) work on motivation leads to the argument that external rewards crowd out intrinsic motivation and reduce the individuals work effort because of incentives which are in conflict with the employees moral values and choices. And vice versa, external rewards can help crowd in intrinsic motivation when supporting the employees choices and values. From this point of view, PSM acts upon those external rewards like job characteristics that result in increased intrinsic motivation to perform (e.g. autonomy, task identity and perceived task significance) (Perry and Wise, 1990; Moynihan, 2008; Paarlberg et al., 2008). Hence we assume a positive relationship between PSM and performance. Empirical research occasionally shows moderate positive links between PSM and individual performance, but the evidence remains mixed (Brewer and Selden, 2000; Kim, 2005; Bogh Andersen and Pallesen, 2008; Park and Rainey, 2008). While some authors determine individual performance using interviewee information obtained from the last performance appraisal (Naff and Crum, 1999; Brewer et al., 2000; Camilleri, 2006) or by means of salary levels and promotions as productivity measurement (Alonso and Lewis, 2001), others apply efficiency and effectiveness measures determining organizational performance (Brewer and Selden, 2000; Kim, 2005; Park and Rainey, 2008). Elsewhere, the importance of self-set goals is used to explain the reason for different performance levels (Locke and Latham, 1990), or the readiness to identify and bond with an organization in terms of OC serves as a predictor for performance behaviour (Crewson, 1997). Very rare are more objective performance measures such as, for example, quantitative output data as in the work of Bogh Andersen and Pallesen (2008).To measure organizational performance is one of the greatest challenges in public management research because of the multifaceted characteristics of public service performance as part of a plural society and different actors who have their own subjective performance criteria (Brewer and Selden, 2000; Kim, 2005; Boyne et al., 2007). Furthermore, output and outcome of public institutions are not easy to measure, since indicators are frequently insufficient or cannot be measured due to a lack of data. Boyne (2002a, 2003) and Andrews et al. (2005) use
seven dimensions of public service performance based on the 3Es model and the input-output-outcome model of organizational performance for their analysis. These dimensions include the quantity and quality of outputs, efficiency, equity, outcomes, value for money and consumer satisfaction. Even though not explicitly mentioned, these models comprehend the dimension of administrative processes which become especially relevant in the context of complex services and when measuring outputs and outcomes gets difficult (Ouchi, 1979; Eisenhardt, 1985). Against the backdrop of so-called High Performance Organizations (Popovich, 1998; Becker et al., 2001), which exhibit a better ratio between performance and their associated resources when compared to other organizations, Rainey and Steinbauer (1999) and Brewer and Selden (2000) develop different dimensions of organizational performance in public institutions. Brewer and Selden (2000) proposed a perceptual measure of organizational performance combining the individual, programme and organizational levels of performance. On the one hand, they distinguish between two organizational performance perspectives, namely, internal and external; on the other hand, performance variables in public institutions must be reinforced on a broader basis, and for this Brewer and Selden use efficiency, effectiveness and fairness. Accordingly, all three performance variables can be oriented internally or externally. Using Korean data, Kim (2005) demonstrates that PSM has a positive influence on these performance variables, even if it is less positive than job satisfaction, affective commitment and organizational citizenship. In the following discussion, internal efficiency will be used as the performance variable. The above mentioned theoretical link between motivation and performance as well as the results from the studies related to the influence of PSM on performance variables leads to our first hypothesis:
H1: The higher the public service motivation, the higher the organizations internal efficiency.
The argument that attitudes like commitment and job satisfaction are related to performance has a long history. It has been proposed that work satisfaction strengthens organizational performance. Organizations that alienate workers will be less effective and efficient, and dissatisfied employees usually work less hard and fulfil their task to less satisfaction than frustrated ones (Etzioni, 1964; Gross and Etzioni, 1985). Human relations and human resource approaches argue that satisfied employees are productive employees (Mayo, 1933; McGregor, 1960; Likert, 1961). Positive attitudes can be achieved through maintaining a positive social organizational environment, such as by providing good communication, autonomy, participation, and mutual trust (Likert, 1961; Argyris, 1964). Employee satisfaction and sentiments influence the development of routine patterns of interaction. Through daily associations with others, employees develop relationships at work that fall into routine patterns, patterns that prescribe behavioural expectations and influence behaviours. Positive attitudes result in patterns that are directed towards achieving the organizations objectives (Roethlisberger, 1959). Attitudes such as satisfaction or commitment of employees are important factors in determining their behaviour and responses at work, and it is through these behaviours and responses that organizational performance can be achieved.
OC as the second attitudinal dimension of this study is characterized by the individuals bonding, identification and dedicated commitment to the organization (Mowday et al., 1979, 1982). Meyer and Allen (1991) have developed the most widely disseminated OC concept, which makes a distinction between affective, continuous and normative OC. OC has a positive correlation to job satisfaction, motivation and attendance as well as a negative one to fluctuation, tendencies to fluctuation and absenteeism (Mowday et al., 1979, 1982; Mathieu and Zajac, 1990). Affective and normative commitment have a positive correlation to performance behaviour, while continuous commitment results in insignificant or negative links in this regard (Meyer et al., 1989). The correlation between OC and effective performance is only weakly substantiated. The research findings show that OCs direct influence on job performance is only slight (Mowday et al., 1982; Mathieu and Zajac, 1990). Romzek (1990) concluded that there is a positive relationship between OC and performance behaviour, since employees with strong OC are more committed to organizational goals and exhibit a greater willingness to work hard. This indicates a positive correlation between OC and extra-role behaviour, proactivity, and furthermore organizational citizenship behaviour, all of which contribute positively to the performance of an organization (Matiaske and Weller, 2003). We are therefore led to deduce our next hypothesis:
H2: The greater the organizational commitment, the higher the internal efficiency.
Against the backdrop of social exchange theories (March and Simon, 1958), the correlation between PSM and OC is based on the assumption that the more personality traits and motives correspond with organizational conditions and incentives, the more OC increases (Knoke and Wright-Isak, 1982). Various studies conclude that, given similarly high job motivation for employees in the public and private sectors, the former namely, public sector employees compensate for lower extrinsic incentives with intrinsic incentives in terms of contributions made to the superordinate goals of public institutions (Rainey, 1979; Baldwin, 1984; Frank, 2004). We therefore conclude that employees in public institutions who ascribe more weight to the public interest and to serving the government and society than they do to the limited economic incentives existing in public administration, should exhibit greater OC (Perry and Wise, 1990; Crewson, 1997). The correlation examined in this article considers PSM to be an antecedent to OC (Steers, 1975; Perry and Wise, 1990; Castaing, 2006). Perry and Wise (1990) operate on the premise that the greater the PSM, the more likely a person will be committed to a public programme. [S]ome public employees may be motivated by a commitment to a public program because of personal identification with a program. In many instances, however, commitment to a program may emanate from a genuine conviction about its social importance (Perry and Wise, 1990: 369). According to the literature on personenvironment and personorganization fit (Muchinsky and Monahan, 1987; Kristof, 1996), employees having strong norms about performing public service are likely to be committed to their organizations (Steijn and Leisink, 2006; Taylor, 2008). The third hypothesis is derived from this:
H3: Employees with higher public service motivation exhibit greater organizational commitment.
Job satisfaction as the last attitudinal dimension indicates the extent to which employees like their jobs. It is shaped by comparing the incentives offered by the work and the work environment, as well as by individual motives. Job satisfaction therefore includes how an employee feels about his or her job and aspects of the job (Locke, 1976). It has a positive correlation with various individual concepts of employee motivation, for example, job involvement, organizational citizenship behaviour, organizational commitment and also job performance (Bateman and Strasser, 1984; Judge et al., 2001). To some extent, public administration employees are characterized as being less satisfied with their work when compared to persons working in the private sector (Rainey, 1989). Overall, however, based upon empirical results (Yousef, 2000; Judge et al., 2001), one can assume that job satisfaction generally affects performance in a positive way, which allows us to deduce the following hypothesis:
H4: The greater the job satisfaction, the greater the internal efficiency.
From an economic perspective the analysis of motivational and attitudinal measures at the individual level and performance at the organizational level as undertaken by Brewer and Selden (2000) and Kim (2005) is questioned. The analysis of individuallevel factors and their impact on organizational performance needs more explanation with respect to intervening variables (e.g. institutional variables). And the aggregation of individual-level measures for attitudes into an organizational measure makes the causal attribution between attitudes and organizational performance difficult. However, from an organizational behaviourist perspective, [t]he individual is the fundamental building block and the fundamental determinant of effectiveness (Cummings, 1983). Organizations and individuals are interdependent and therefore the perception of individuals about organizational performance may not be independent of the real performance (Brewer and Selden, 2000; Pfeffer and Salancik, 2003).
4. Institutional factors and performance

In addition to the influence of PSM, OC and job satisfaction on internal efficiency, in our model we examine the relationship between goal orientation on the organizational level, leadership behaviour of supervisors and internal efficiency. Both goal dimension and leadership are frequently called performance predictors. Further institutional factors include the size of administrative units and the extent of managerial reform. Against the backdrop of goal-setting theory (Locke and Latham, 1990), Perry et al. (2006) as well as Wright (2004, 2007) studied the influence of mission, organizational goals and goal conflicts on job motivation, and determined that employees in public institutions exhibit higher job motivation if their tasks are clearly comprehensible, challenging, important and achievable. By being able to reinforce task-related goals, the mission and organizational goals thus have a positive effect upon job motivation. According to Locke and Latham (1990), employees pursue with more commitment those goals that, from their perspective, are connected to more important goals and are achievable for them. Rainey and Steinbauer (1999) see the effectiveness and performance of government agencies as being influenced by the three factors task, mission and public service. And according to Latham et al. (1988), preset goals and
mutually developed goals are equally effective with regard to improving performance. We therefore deduce the hypothesis:
H5: The higher the goal dimension in relation to organizational goals, the greater the internal efficiency.
The leadership behaviour of supervisors considerably influences the motivation and behaviour of the employees (Burns, 1978; Judge et al., 2004). In the public sector, leadership behaviour is also considered to be an important factor influencing organizational change, job satisfaction and organizational performance (Hennessey, 1998; Thompson, 2000; Meyer and OToole, 2002; Kim, 2005; Park and Rainey, 2008), although Brewer and Selden (2000) could document only a weak influence on organizational performance in their study. In particular, research on transformational leadership behaviour was able to show that, in contrast to transactional leadership, extra performance can be attained by the expansion and inspiration of individual goals (Bass and Avolio, 1990). Park and Rainey (2008) showed that transformationoriented leadership as well as the interaction of transformation-oriented leadership and public service-oriented motivation have positive relations to perceived performance. Also, leadership behaviour in the sense of consideration and initiating structure shows a strong relation with employee performance and satisfaction. Several studies show that consideration and initiating structure are positively related to productivity and satisfaction (House, 1971; House et al., 1971; Miles and Petty, 1977). In the light of path-goal theory (House, 1996) it is the leaders responsibility to align worker and organizational goals and then ensure that the employees path to goal attainment is clear (Van Wart, 2005: 318). Supportive and participative leadership behaviour that strengthens leadership consideration motivates subordinates to contribute to successful task completion and helps to clarify processes to attain individual and organizational goals. Therefore, we assume that leadership behaviour of supervisors in the sense of consideration, initiating structure and participation has a positive effect upon internal efficiency such as the reduction of costs, simplification of processes and decision-making. From this, we deduce the following hypothesis:
H6: The more pronounced the leadership behaviour of the supervisor, the greater the internal efficiency.
Institutional dimensions are often seen as a main influence on organizational performance. There exists a rich body of work concerning issues like the comparison between public and private institutions (Boyne, 2002b), centralization and concentration of power (Pollitt, 2005), formalization and reliance on rules (Pandey and Scott, 2002), and like hierarchy, complexity and size (Kalleberg et al., 1996). The size of organization is one important correlate in analysing organizational performance. Transaction costs and economies of scale lead to different arguments in favour of small or large organizations; examples are strengthened responsiveness through fragmentation or amalgamation of local municipalities to improve administrative performance (Boyne, 2003; Boyne et al., 2003). On the one hand, larger organizations are often structurally more complex than smaller ones and are therefore typically bureaucracy driven (Parkinson, 1957). On the other hand, after a certain point larger organizations tend to have less administrative overheads and could therefore be
more efficient. Even if the effects of size on the performance of public organizations are not clear, we follow the general criticism against bureaucracy and low performance of large public institutions. Because larger organizations show greater horizontal and vertical complexity, we deduce the hypothesis that time of decision-making and simplification of processes are in a negative relationship to size:
H7: The larger an organization, the lower the internal efficiency.
A second institutional dimension analysed in this study raises the question of the influence of institutional reform on performance. As stated at the beginning, so-called New Public Management reforms are implemented around the globe and show a great variety of type. The reforms at the federal level in Switzerland are in line with the typical managerial modernization programmes of Western European administrations. Performance contracts and one-line budgets based on product groups combined with indicators and standards, accrual accounting and performance-oriented reporting measures, management by objectives and performance pay systems characterize the federal reform programme, which is called Fhren mit Leistungsauftrag und Globalbudget FLAG (Steering by performance contract and one-line budget) (Ritz, 2003). The programme includes 24 administrative units at the federal level, of which the first began in 1997. For these units the managerial room for manoeuvre is higher compared to the other units because of more flexibility in use of resource and financial management (e.g. possibility to raise revenues through commercialized services). All of the reform units need to implement a full strategic planning process with an integrated reporting system based on performance indicators from the top level to every individual employee. Deducing from the whole NPM-philosophy which does not characterize a converging reform trajectory (Pollitt, 2007), but which follows the same underlying principles of neo-institutional economics and public choice theory (Gruening, 2001; Pollitt and Bouckaert, 2004), our last hypothesis is:
H8: Administrative units which took part in the New Public Management reform programme show higher internal efficiency.
In addition to these two dimensions, the following demographic and organizational features are also included as independent variables in the analysis: gender, age, leadership position, wage class, tenure, size and native language in the federal administration.
5. Data and method

The data for this study were collected within the framework of the 2007 employee survey of the Swiss federal administration. The survey was planned as a random survey, although complete surveys were carried out in numerous administrative units due to the small number of employees in these units. All seven ministries of the Swiss federal administration took part in the survey. Based on the responses and the statistical indices of the 2005 personnel survey, one representative random sampling per unit was taken, which was also examined according to the representative distribution of socio-demographic features (language, sex, age, wage class). A total of 26,774 people were given the questionnaire, which corresponds to
approximately three-quarters of the federal personnel. The response rate was 51 percent of those surveyed (13,532 responses), and the response quota in the seven ministries ranged from 46 to 62 percent. The survey, which was generally administered as an internet-based questionnaire, was carried out in German, French and Italian. Employees without internet access were provided with paper questionnaires. Dimensions and items The survey included 94 items, which were given to all participants, plus nine sociodemographic variables. Twenty-five items were used for the current study (see Appendix). The individual items were developed collaboratively with the project leaders of the human resources office of the federal administration and selected managers. Two workshops were held during the conference of the human resources delegates of the federal administration, and there were 10 manager interviews with partially structured interview topics. On the one hand, this procedure made it possible to adapt the recommended topic areas and variables to the situation of the federal administration. On the other hand, the scales used were restricted to a certain number of items. For this reason we couldnt use the fully developed original scales for certain dimensions (e.g. OC, PSM). The PSM items were developed on the basis of two dimensions: Attraction to Public Policy-making and Commitment to the Public Interest (Perry, 1996). The items for the first dimension were formulated in a positive way in contrast to the reversed wording of Perry. The OC items were developed using the scale of Meyer and Allen (1991), where the two dimensions affective commitment and continuous commitment have been used. The last attitudinal measure was a general item for overall job satisfaction. The items for measuring leadership behaviour by the supervisor exhibit a similarity to individual dimensions of transformational leadership behaviour (Bass and Avolio, 1990), employee consideration, direction and support (House, 1996), but they were largely developed in collaboration with the project leaders of the Swiss federal administration. The items for measuring goal orientation emerged against the backdrop of studies on high performance organizations (Becker et al., 2001; Corporate Leadership Council, 2002) and of effective government organizations, respectively (Rainey and Steinbauer, 1999; Brewer and Selden, 2000). The independent control variable size is based on the number of full-time equivalents of each of the 74 administrative units. In our study we measured the dependent variable performance with an index based on three adapted items of internal efficiency with a strong focus on procedural efficiency (Brewer and Selden, 2000; Kim, 2005). These are related to cost reduction, process simplification and timely decision-making in the surveyed administrative units. These self-reported measures show some limitations of our study. A measurement concept with multiple dimensions and perspectives from different actors (e.g. customer satisfaction) and more objective or at least external performance measures created by government authorities would be more reliable (Walker and Boyne, 2006). However, the three-item performance measure of internal efficiency which was used
has some strength for the given situation in Swiss federal government. First, in comparison to a general single-item performance measure (e.g. Pandey et al., 2007) the measure used isnt an abstract concept of perceived performance. Rather, it is clearly focused on procedural efficiency and relates to the respondents daily work, that is their organizational unit. Second, external performance measures dont exist in the federal administration, and because of the strong reform focus on internal modernization the measure of internal efficiency should be at least one solid indicator for organizational performance. Third, whenever performance gets measured, it is an abstraction of something else (Pandey et al., 2007). [O]rganizational performance is a sociallyconstructed concept and all measures of performance are subjective. . . . This is why perceptual measures are appropriate (Wall et al., 2004; Brewer, 2006: 36). Furthermore, several studies show that objective measured performance correlates positively with measures of perceived performance (Powell 1992; Bommer et al., 1995; Delaney and Huselid, 1996; ). The use of perceptual measures is passable, especially for institutions where no objective performance data are available as in public administrations or non-profit organizations (Delaney and Huselid, 1996). All of these items were surveyed using a 6-point Likert scale, with 1 being the lowest and 6 being the highest rating. Measurement The more complex dimensions of the study (PSM, OC, goal orientation, leadership behaviour, internal efficiency) were reduced using confirmatory factor analysis. The factors are extracted by principal component analysis using varimax Kaiser normalization as rotation method. The respective scale reliability coefficients are listed in Table 1 and are comparable with other studies (Kim, 2005). PSM has a scale reliability coefficient of 0.898 for the dimension attraction to public policy-making and 0.756 for commitment to the public interest. The Lambda values lie between 0.76 and 0.94, exhibiting support for the discriminant validity of the measures used. Organizational commitment was measured with the two dimensions of affective commitment ( = 0.804; Lambda between 0.73 and 0.90) and continuous commitment (single item). Leadership behaviour of the supervisor shows a scale reliability coefficient of 0.933, with Lambda values from 0.82 to 0.89. Organizational goal orientation ( = 0.886) has Lambda values from 0.81 to 0.89. The dimension internal efficiency has an alpha value of 0.829 and Lambda remains between 0.85 and 0.88. The descriptive statistics for all variables are shown in Table 1. In all, 106 of 120 bivariate correlations are significant at least at the 5 percent level. The prevalence of significant correlations can have different causes. On the one hand, the one-sided methodology using a self-report questionnaire at a specific time can result in monomethod bias, since correlations arise due to hidden, systematic features that support the measured variables (Spector, 1994). On the other hand, above all, the large-scale effect may well lose its impact, since the scope of this studys sample was large enough to identify statistically significant correlations with only 0.5 percent divided variance (Diekmann, 2002). In light of what are nevertheless deep correlations apart from six values above 0.5, all values lie between 0 and 0.5 the variables, however, can be considered sufficiently differentiated.
Table 1 Bivariate correlations and reliabilities

N 1 2
Meani 3.48 4.09 4.06 4.80 2.47 4.32 4.39 4.13 1.73 3.86 1.65 2.93 3.17 2.78 1.19 1.23
SDi 1.11 1.25 1.01 0.90 1.49 1.19 0.97 1.27 0.44 1.06 0.48 1.01 0.98 0.56 0.46 0.42
1 (.829) 0.05** 0.24** 0.38** 0.21** 0.44** 0.59** 0.51** 0.05** 0.03** 0.05** 0.04** 0.06** 0.07** 0.01 0.03**
Interitem correlations (Item No.) 6 7 8 9 10
11
12
13
14
15
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Internal efficiency Attraction to public policy-making Commitment to the public interest Affective commitment Continuous commitment Leadership behaviour Goal orientation Job satisfaction Gendera Ageb Leadership positionc Waged Tenuree Sizef Reform unitg Native languageh
13,326 13,400 13,250 13,413 13,296 13,271 13,026 13,336 13,291 13,256 13,314 13,091 13,352 12,848 13,436 13,034
(.898) 0.41** 0.17** 0.04** 0.04** 0.10** 0.00 0.07** 0.12** 0.14** 0.27** 0.04** 0.16** 0.06** 0.10** (.756) 0.41** (.804) 0.08** 0.21** 0.15** 0.31** 0.25** (.933) 0.25** 0.41** 0.25** 0.62** (.886) 0.20** 0.40** 0.33** 0.56** 0.56** 0.03** 0.06** 0.09** 0.02* 0.03**0.05** 0.09** 0.08** 0.17** 0.06** 0.00 0.05** 0.17** 0.11** 0.17** 0.07** 0.01 0.10** 0.01 0.25** 0.12** 0.12** 0.06** 0.12** 0.06** 0.10** 0.00 0.14** 0.19** 0.35** 0.04** 0.07** 0.21** 0.10** 0.06**0.10** 0.18** 0.60** 0.17** 0.10** 0.07** 0.01 0.11** 0.08** 0.11**0.05** 0.27** 0.02* 0.13** 0.30** 0.18** 0.03** 0.02 0.04** 0.04** 0.04** 0.07** 0.05** 0.00 0.08** 0.00 0.06** 0.23** 0.01 0.02 0.03** 0.02* 0.05**0.00 0.06**0.06** 0.05** 0.00 0.03** 0.04** 0.05**
*p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; Pearson correlation coefficient (also used for ordinal data of item nos 10, 12, 13 because a metric scale could not be applied due to practical reasons); a Gender is coded 0 = female, 1 = male; b Age is coded 1 = below 20 years, 2 = 2129, 3 = 3039, 4 = 4049, 5 = 5059, 6 = above 60; c Leadership position is coded 0 = no, 1 = yes; d Wage is coded 1 = salary class 111, 2 = 1217, 3 = 1823, 4 = 2429, 5 = 30- 38; e Tenure is coded 1 = until 1 year, 2 = 15, 3 = 610, 4 = more than 10; f Size (FTE) is converted by log10; g Reform unit is coded 0 = no reform unit, 1 = reform unit; h Native language is coded 0 = German, 1 = French/Italian/other; i Mean and standard deviation of dimensions 1 to 4 and 6 are calculated as additive indexes.
The model tested within the framework of this study met the requirements of the ordinary least squares regression analysis.1 For this, the estimated values for each independent variable were calculated in relation to internal efficiency.
6. Findings and discussion

Univariate analysis The univariate statistics show the following results (see Appendix). Interest in politics within the PSM dimension attraction to public policy-making has the highest average value (mean: 4.31). This is in contrast to the comparably low interest in politicians and their work (3.86). The interest focusing on how relevant the work is for society is seen in the PSM dimension commitment to the public interest. Its lower values (4.25, 4.14, 3.79) compared to the above mentioned interest in politics does not confirm the findings of Brewer et al. (2000) whereas the primary motives of public employees are to serve the public and not to participate in the policy-making process. The respondents are less positive when their involvement with the public sector is compared to a specifically self-interested motive such as the attainment of personal goals in the third item of this dimension. The latter aspect is comparable to Perrys findings (1996). Overall, this supports the results of other studies, which emphasize the subordinate significance of extrinsic incentives in comparison to the organizational goals and work content for public administration employees (Crewson, 1997; Brewer and Selden, 2000; Brewer et al., 2000; Houston, 2000; Bright, 2005; Wright, 2007). Compared to the responses on PSM, those on affective commitment consistently exhibited more positive values. By way of comparison, particularly the individuals willingness to work hard was valued very high. This tends to contradict the widespread views regarding the willingness of civil servants to work hard and the extra motivation exhibited by civil servants. Due to the surveys being self-reported, as well as possible influences of social desirability, this high average of 5.00 should be interpreted cautiously. Overall, however, the mean clearly shows a consistently strong commitment to the federal administration. Furthermore, it is interesting that the dimension of goal orientation is assessed quite positively or clearly above the scales average. This more likely contradicts the goal-setting function in public administrations which has been called difficult above all on the organizational level (Rainey, 1993). The mean for goal orientation is also differentiated quite distinctly from the indicators on internal efficiency. The responses on cost reduction, process simplification and timely decision-making attain values that are average for the scale. Bivariate analysis The correlations between the independent variables were examined using a correlational analysis (see Table 1). Modest positive correlation values were seen between goal orientation and leadership behaviour (r = 0.62, p < .01), tenure and age (r = 0.60, p < .01), goal orientation and internal efficiency (r = 0.59, p < .01), job satisfaction and leadership behaviour (r = 0.56, p < .01) or goal orientation (r = 0.56, p <
.01). Overall, both dimensions of PSM have a significantly positive correlation with affective commitment, but only commitment to the public interest shows a moderately strong correlation (r = 0.41, p < .01); attraction to public policy-making has only a weak correlation to affective commitment (r = 0.17, p < .01). With regard to continuous commitment, the PSM dimension attraction to public policy-making (r = 0.04, p < .01) shows a slightly negative correlation. Affective commitment shows a moderate positive correlation to goal orientation (r = 0.41, p < .01), in contrast to continuous commitment (r = 0.25, p < .01). Goal orientation correlates quite strongly with leadership behaviour (r = 0.62, p < .01). This result has to be interpreted cautiously because of the two items indicating individual goal setting within the dimension of goal orientation which are related to the supervisors behaviour. Thus, the third hypothesis (H3) can be mainly confirmed in relation to one PSM dimension. Employees with higher commitment to the public interest exhibit stronger affective commitment. Furthermore, willingness to leave the federal administration is more probable for those employees who have a greater attraction to policy-making. Leaving the federal administration is therefore considered a loss primarily by those employees who feel particularly committed to the public interest. These findings support the positive correlation between PSM and affective commitment determined by Kim (2005). The study by Crewson (1997), who examined the influence of service orientation compared to the preference for economic rewards in employees of the American federal administration, shows similar trends. According to his study, employees having a high service orientation exhibit greater OC. Camilleri (2006) identified an influence of OC on PSM and named PSM the macro-concept, which is positively influenced by changes on the micro-level (OC). The present study supports these findings and it leads to the following further insight: one of the PSM dimensions, namely commitment to the public interest, has a moderately strong positive correlation with affective commitment. In order to be able to recognize the importance of the separated, independent variables of PSM, OC, leadership, goal orientation and job satisfaction with respect to internal efficiency, the standardized coefficients of the regression analysis are examined. For the regression analysis, the factor scores of each dimension were used to calculate the coefficients (see Table 2). The adjusted multiple coefficient of determination is 0.437, which is indicative of the models explanatory power, although it shows a potential for improvement. One reason for this may be the selective choice of influencing factors of internal efficiency, in contrast to a model computation using a comprehensive set of influencing factors, for example, those in Brewer and Selden (2000). The survey carried out by the author uses such a model of comprehensive performance analysis for the Swiss federal administration. For the present study, the focus of the analysis, however, was limited to the specified indicators related to human resource characteristics, leadership and control variables. All dimensions except for attraction to public policy-making exhibit significant values. In comparison to the other dimensions, attraction to public policy-making does not exert a relevant influence on internal efficiency. This confirms the expectations according to which questions of procedural efficiency and cost savings represent typical features of a management rationality, and persons who are particularly attracted to politics more likely follow a political or bureaucratic rationality (Niskanen,
Ritz Public service motivation in Switzerland 67 Table 2 Regressions to explain internal efficiency Unstandardized Standard coefficient (B) error Independent variables Attraction to public policy-making Commitment to the public interest Affective commitment Continuous commitment Leadership behaviour Goal orientation Job satisfaction Independent control variables Gendera Ageb Leadership positionc Waged Tenuree Sizef Reform unitg Native languageh R2 Adj. R2 F-Value N .006 .068** .081** .013* .060** .398** .180** .008 .008 .008 .005 .009 .009 .008 p .4436 .0000 .0000 .0131 .0000 .0000 .0000 Standardized coefficient () .006 .068 .081 .020 .060 .399 .229
.017 .010 .061** .117** .000 .091** .089** .107** .438 .437 558.764** 10,763
.018 .009 .017 .009 .009 .015 .019 .018
.3590 .2423 .0000 .0000 .9843 .0000 .0000 .0000
.007 .011 .029 .117 .000 .051 .036 .044
*p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; a Gender is coded 0 = female, 1 = male; b Age is coded 1 = below 20 year, 2 = 2129, 3 = 3039, 4 = 4049, 5 = 5059, 6 = above 60; c Leadership position is coded 0 = no, 1 = yes; d Wage is coded 1 = salary class 111, 2 = 1217, 3 = 1823, 4 = 2429, 5 = 3038; e Tenure is coded 1 = until 1 year, 2 = 15, 3 = 610, 4 = more than 10; f Size (FTE) is converted by log10; g Reform unit is coded 0 = no reform unit, 1 = reform unit; h Native language is coded 0 = German, 1 = French/Italian/other.
1971; Schedler, 2003). Camilleri (2006) suggests in his findings that individuals with strong attraction to policy making tendencies appear to be more self-centred or selfseeking. The informal performance measures examined in his study, for example, pay and promotion equity, are more important for these persons than internal efficiency. Goal orientation shows the greatest correlation with performance ( = 0.398; p < .01). Then come job satisfaction ( = 0.180; p < .01), affective commitment ( = 0.081; p < .01), commitment to the public interest ( = 0.068; p < .01), leadership behaviour ( = 0.060; p < .01), continuous commitment with a negative correlation ( = 0.013; p < .05) and finally with a more or less negligible correlation, attraction to public policy-making ( = 0.007). One can therefore partially maintain that the previously formulated hypothesis H1 can be confirmed: the PSM dimension commitment to the public interest exhibits a positive correlation to internal efficiency. H2 is
partially confirmed too, since one form of OC, continuous commitment, exhibits a negative correlation to internal efficiency. The negative correlation between continuous commitment and internal efficiency is surprising. The more bound employees are to the federal administration, the more negative they assess internal efficiency. The explanation could be that more continuously committed employees show a higher willingness to criticize the organization and lower job satisfaction (see Table 1). H4 is confirmed, since job satisfaction exerts a comparably high positive influence on the target variable. The goal dimension in terms of deriving subordinate goals from superordinate goals shows the strongest positive correlation with internal efficiency and confirms H5. The measured leadership behaviour is positively correlated with the target variable, although comparably low. However, this result confirms H6. These results concerning the attitudinal measures exhibit the same order as those of Kim (2005). Job satisfaction is mentioned there as a more influential factor for performance when compared to PSM or affective commitment. In comparison to attitudinal measures, the results of the present study particularly show the importance of goal dimension with regard to assessing organizational efficiency. If we compare the present results with those of Brewer and Selden (2000), then it is primarily striking that, in their study, the leadership function in contrast, e.g. to PSM has a clearly predictive power. Brewer and Selden refer, among other things, to an indirect influence of leadership on performance, since leadership shapes the culture, which, according to their results, exhibits decisive influencing power. In the present study, leadership was measured using supervisor behaviour. But supervisor behaviour exerts only a weak influence on internal efficiency. Goal orientation shows a much stronger correlation and characterizes above all the process of goal operationalization from the superior organizational level to the individual level of the employees. This cascading derivation of goals from superior goals has a rather clear correlation to cost orientation, process simplification and timely decision-making. Without having examined the content of goal-setting processes, however, it is difficult to say whether, ultimately, the goal-setting process or the different goals at any one time were the decisive factor for the more positive assessment of internal efficiency by the respondents. The results can be interpreted to read that the leadership of supervisors based upon established management-by-objectives systems exerts greater influence on internal efficiency when compared to the motivational factors, but the goal dimension seems to be the decisive factor. This emphasizes the significance of management-by-objective processes in the everyday life of managers and supports the results of the OECD (2005), according to which, in conjunction with the analysis of performance pay systems, management by objectives is clearly attributed more significance than performance pay. The control variables studied in the regression analysis show that wage level, leadership position, size and native language correlate significantly with the performance measure. This means that the lower the income or the more likely a person is to be a manager, the more positive is the assessment of internal efficiency. Managers thus express themselves more positively regarding efforts at cost savings, process simplification, or decision-making behaviour. This is not very surprising, since, when answering questions on internal efficiency, managers include these things as part of their managerial responsibility. The result on leadership position supports the results
of Kim (2005). Native language has quite a high impact on internal efficiency 77 percent of employees have German as their native language, 19 percent French and 4 percent Italian or other languages. This shows the high multicultural and multilingual situation in the Swiss federal administration. The French and Italian speakers evaluate performance higher. One explanation leads us to the local, cultural and linguistic vicinity of the French and Italian regions of Switzerland to France and Italy. In comparison to Switzerland, both countries have a more centralized administrative structure and culture. The state and its institutions have a greater presence, and are a more relevant and powerful actor in the daily life of people. The comparably high correlation between language and attraction to public policy-making for these languages supports this. In these regions policy-making can be seen as more related to power in decision-making or to social status and therefore as more attractive. As a consequence the result can be interpreted in the sense that French and Italian speakers in our dataset who chose the federal administration as employer have in general a more positive attitude towards the performance of public institutions. Another explanation leads to the preferred treatment of minority groups in the federal administration when selecting or promoting equally qualified employees. This could lessen criticism against the organization and its performance. The independent variables gender, age and tenure do not show any significant effects. The insignificant correlation between performance and tenure as well as its positive correlation to leadership position are comparable to the results of Naff and Crum (1999). The correlation between size and internal efficiency confirms the widespread criticism against large bureaucratized administrations (H7). To work in a reformed unit does not show a positive correlation with the target variable and leads to the rejection of H8. This raises two questions of high practical relevance. First, employees of reorganized and performance-oriented administrative units do not assess internal efficiency significantly higher than employees from other units maybe because they have become more sensitive and critical towards the efficiency measures applied? Or did the rhetoric of efficiency and modernization in these administrative units not change very much?
7. Conclusion
The management reforms in public administration have been strongly focusing on performance-oriented management tools and higher individual and organizational performance over the past two decades. In Switzerland, this is seen in the movement of various concepts of human resource management from the private economy into the public sector, for example, performance pay systems or performance-oriented competency models for HR recruitment, appraisal and development strategies. Since 2007, the Swiss federal administration has adapted its HR evaluation strategy and has also focused on employee performance and employee commitment. The present article analyses the HR survey results by studying the internal efficiency dependent upon PSM, OC, job satisfaction, goal orientation and leadership. The use of existing items on the diverse concepts has proved to be valuable, since all factors could be discretely derived. Nevertheless, the study has some important limitations. The measures used for organizational performance cover only one, non-objective dimension of
the multifaceted performance construct. Furthermore, all results rely on self-reported measures from one sample on one date. The findings basically confirm previous studies, e.g. those of Kim (2005), Brewer and Selden (2000) and Crewson (1997), which studied the performance of public administration from the viewpoint of PSM, OC and job satisfaction. The relationship between motivation, commitment and job satisfaction of public employees and the dependent variable internal efficiency in terms of cost reduction, process simplification and decision-making is positive within the Swiss federal administration. At the same time, the results concerning the two PSM dimensions show that the efficiency increase that was studied is supported by those employees who have great interest in public service and not by the dimension attraction to public policy-making. To put it simply: the higher the employees commitment to the public interest, the higher the internal efficiency. In comparison to these influencing factors, however, it could be determined that the dimension of organization-wide goal orientation which has been analysed clearly exerts more influence on internal efficiency. To put it simply again: the more goal oriented an organizational unit is, the higher its internal efficiency. From the perspective of perceptual measures these results have to be questioned. It could also be that the more highly committed to the public interest employees are, the better they think about their organization and as a consequence they assess efficiency as being higher. But this interpretation would lead to the expectation of the same link between continuous commitment and efficiency assessment. However, the analysis shows that the higher continuous commitment, the lower the assessment of internal efficiency. Therefore we conclude with the first interpretation that where commitment to the public interest and to the organization is higher, and employees work in a more goal-oriented management context, therefore the organizational performance is higher. Where employees observe supervisor behaviour that is comparable to transformational and consideration-oriented leadership, the internal efficiency is assessed to be greater. Leadership behaviour that is very supportive, that motivates employees in their work, that provides regular feedback, that gives praise and that is open to change may influence the variables under study in a positive manner. Against the backdrop of the other results (Park and Rainey, 2008), this admits the interpretation that supervisor behaviour that is capable of emphasizing the specific features of public work during both goal setting and feedback can contribute to higher internal efficiency in public administrations. These results underscore the value of leadership behaviour accounting for distinctive motives and incentives in the public sector. Goal orientation in terms of deriving subordinate goals from superior goals has been shown to have the greatest influence on internal efficiency. Over the past few years, the Swiss federal administration has made numerous efforts to introduce management by objectives and employee assessments throughout its system. The existing results clearly show the importance of appropriate management tools on both the organizational and individual levels. Furthermore, previous study results are reinforced, since goal orientation, as well as OC and commitment to the public interest, are supported. This elucidates the importance of specifically adapted management tools in public administrations and argues for restraint in the use of private sector management techniques in the public sector. Goal dimension and result
orientation are key components of management in public administrations. They become effective, however, only when they take into consideration the specific motivational context of public employees. The present study could therefore show, among other things, that leaving the federal administration is thus assessed as a loss primarily by those employees who feel particularly committed to serving the public interest. At the same time, this PSM dimension leads to higher performance-oriented attitudes, e.g. affective commitment. In contrast to goal orientation, there is no positive relationship between employees of New Public Management reform units and the performance measure. The federal reform starting in 1997 was a typical internal modernization programme establishing performance contracts and one-line budgets between agencies, ministries and parliament (Ritz, 2003). Why do the management reforms with their central component of the public sectors new orientation in terms of improving goal setting, delegation and performance measurement (Hood, 1991) not show an impact on internal efficiency? Besides the general doubt about the effectiveness of the reform measures in a context of strong political rationality at the federal level, we have to keep in mind that reform movements like NPM also influence the culture and management system of non-reformed agencies which try to catch up with the modernizers. After ten years of reform it seems to be difficult to distinguish between explicitly reformed and non-reformed agencies and it seems that a first mover effect does not exist anymore. To summarize, a key challenge for politicians and administrators is to fulfil the demands for results-oriented management and, at the same time, not to destroy the distinctive motivation of public employees. For example, in Switzerland, cost-of-living increases have not been granted for some years and actual earnings have stagnated or even decreased. Combined with ineffective pay-for-performance systems, this has had a decisively negative influence on the work climate in public administration. The present study calls for a reflection upon current human resource policies which characterize many incentives in the public sector as unjustified privileges of civil servants. Frequent attempts are being made to increase the performance of public employees using oversimplified steering tools, without recognizing that, more likely, the opposite is occurring and that the responsibility of public employees is being called into question. To increase performance in the modern constitutional state, both are necessary: employees who are committed to the public interest and to the organization as well as a soundly managed and goal-oriented public administration.
Note
1 Normality of residuals was first checked by a graphical analysis (quantile-quantile plot) which showed approximately normally distributed data. Deviation from normal distribution existed above all in the tailes of distribution which wasnt heavy-tailed. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov-Test then showed a significant deviation (p < .0005), but in relation to the number of observations (N = 10,858) this is not surprising. It is not clear how significant the deviation is for the inferential statistics. Therefore we recommend interpreting the tests of significance with caution. The estimated coefficients can be interpreted as usual without the guarantee of a significant deviation from zero. A further reason for applying the model is the fact that the maximum leverage (max {hi} = 0.00625) is quite small, which makes the violation of the

normality assumption less absolute. Even when the errors are not normally distributed the coefficient estimators stay asymptotically normal distributed if, (1) the maximum leverage converges towards zero, (2) the errors are stochastically independent, and (3) the errors are homoscedastic (which can be shown by Lindebergs central limit theorem). The latter can not be taken for granted in the dataset, but the extent of heteroscedasticity does not seem to be too serious. The Durbin-Watson statistics for checking independence is 2.016 and stands for independent observations. Multicollinearity was checked by the variance inflation factor which lies between 1.026 and 1.741.
Appendix
Questionnaire Items: (Scale: 16; Midpoint: 3.5) Public Service Motivation:
G
I am very interested in politics (dimension: attraction to public policy-making). (Mean: 4.31; SD: 1.33) I am very interested in politicians and their work (dimension: attraction to public policy-making). (Mean: 3.86; SD: 1.29) I consider working in public administration a part of my commitment to society (dimension: commitment to the public interest). (Mean: 4.25; SD: 1.23) I like working in public administration a lot because my work entails the shaping of meaningful, societal topics (dimension: commitment to the public interest). (Mean: 4.14; SD: 1.27) Being able to make a contribution to society means more to me than reaching personal goals (dimension: commitment to the public interest). (Mean: 3.79; SD: 1.19)
Organizational Commitment:
G
The fate of my federal administration is very important to me (dimension: affective commitment). (Mean: 4.84; SD: 1.09) I feel a strong sense of belonging to my administrative unit (dimension: affective commitment). (Mean: 4.51; SD: 1.22) In my work, I am not satisfied with merely meeting goals, but, instead, I try to achieve even better performance (dimension: affective commitment). (Mean: 5.03; SD: 0.87) To leave my organization would be too costly for me, thats why I stay here (dimension: continuous commitment). (Mean: 2.47; SD: 1.49)
Leadership Behaviour:
G
My direct supervisor exemplifies what he or she demands of his/her employees. (Mean: 4.36; SD: 1.41) My direct supervisor is able to inspire employees to attain set goals. (Mean: 4.09; SD: 1.40) My direct supervisor provides me with regular feedback on my job performance and behaviour. (Mean: 4.16; SD: 1.39)

G G
My direct supervisor praises me for good performance. (Mean: 4.30; SD: 1.28) My direct supervisor always tries to have open dialogue with his/her employees. (Mean: 4.47; SD: 1.41) My direct supervisor is open to change. (Mean: 4.53; SD: 1.25)
Goal Orientation:
G G
My individual goals are challenging, but realistic. (Mean: 4.43; SD: 1.25) My individual goals were derived from the departments important goals. (Mean: 4.47; SD: 1.30) The most important goals of our department are derived from the most important goals of our administrative unit. (Mean: 4.39; SD: 1.08) The most important goals of our department are bindingly communicated to all employees of the department. (Mean: 4.31; SD: 1.25) In my department, we know precisely what we have to do to attain the most important goals of the department. (Mean: 4.44; SD: 1.19) In my department, we measure work progress by using set goals. (Mean: 4.23; SD: 1.22)
Job Satisfaction:
G
How satisfied are you overall with your work situation? (Mean: 4.13; SD: 1.27)
Internal Efficiency:
G
In my administrative unit, we consistently work to reduce avoidable costs. (Mean: 3.68; SD: 1.32) In my administrative unit, work processes or documents are consistently being simplified. (Mean: 3.27; SD: 1.27) In my administrative unit, important decisions are made in a timely fashion. (Mean: 3.49; SD: 1.27)
References
Alonso, P. and Lewis, G.B. (2001) Public Service Motivation and Job Performance: Evidence from the Federal Sector, American Review of Public Administration 31(4): 36380. Andrews, R., Boyne, G.A., Meier, K.J., OToole, L.J. Jr and Walker, R.M. (2005) Representative Bureaucracy, Organizational Strategy, and Public Service Performance: An Empirical Analysis of English Local Government, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 15(4): 489504. Argyris, C. (1964) Integrating the Individual in the Organization. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Baldwin, J.N. (1984) Are We Really Lazy?, Review of Public Personnel Administration 4(2): 809. Bass, B.M. and Avolio, B.J. (1990) The Implications of Transactional and Transformational Leadership for Individual, Team, and Organizational Development, in W. Pasmore and R.W. Woodman (eds) Research in Organizational Change and Development, Vol. 4, pp. 23172. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Bateman, T.S. and Strasser, S. (1984) A Longitudinal Analysis of the Antecedents of Organizational Commitment, Academy of Management Journal 27(1): 95112.

Becker, B.E., Huselid, M.A. and Ulrich, D. (2001) The HR Scorecard: Linking People, Strategy, and Performance. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Bogh Andersen, L. and Pallesen, T. (2008) Not Just for the Money? How Financial Incentives Affect the Number of Publications at Danish Research Institutions, International Public Management Journal 11(1): 2847. Bommer, W.H., Johnson, J.L., Rich, G.A., Podsakoff, P.M. and MacKenzie, S.B. (1995) On the Interchangeability of Objective and Subjective Measures of Employee Performance: A Metaanalysis, Personnel Psychology 48(3): 587605. Boyne, G.A. (2002a) Concepts and Indicators of Local Authority Performance: An Evaluation of the Statutory Frameworks in England and Wales, Public Money and Management 22: 1724. Boyne, G.A. (2002b) Public and Private Management: Whats the Difference?, Journal of Management Studies 39: 97122. Boyne, G.A. (2003) Sources of Public Service Improvement: A Critical Review and Research Agenda, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 13(3): 36794. Boyne, G.A., Farrell, C., Law, J., Powell, M. and Walker, R.M. (2003) Evaluating Public Management Reforms: Principles and Practice. Buckingham: Open University Press. Boyne, G.A., Meier, K.J., OToole, L.J. and Walker, R.M. (2007) Public Service Performance: Perspectives on Measurement and Management. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Brewer, G. (2006) All Measures of Performance are Subjective: More Evidence on US Federal Agencies, in G.A. Boyne, K.J. Meier, L.J.J. OToole and R.M. Walker (eds) Public Service Performance: Perspectives on Measurement and Management, pp. 3554. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Brewer, G. (2008) Employee and Organizational Performance, in J.L. Perry and A. Hondeghem (eds) Motivation in Public Management: The Call of Public Service, pp. 13656. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Brewer, G.A. and Selden, S.C. (2000) Why Elephants Gallop: Assessing and Predicting Organizational Performance in Federal Agencies, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 10(4): 685711. Brewer, G.A., Coleman Selden, S. and Facer II, R.L. (2000) Individual Conceptions of Public Service Motivation, Public Administration Review 60(3): 25464. Bright, L. (2005) Public Employees with High Levels of Public Service Motivation, Review of Public Personnel Administration 25(2): 13854. Buelens, M. and Van den Broeck, H. (2007) An Analysis of Differences in Work Motivation between Public and Private Sector Organizations , Public Administration Review 67(1): 6574. Burns, J.M. (1978) Leadership. New York: Harper and Row. Cameron, J. and Pierce, W.D. (2002) Rewards and Intrinsic Motivation: Resolving the Controversy. Westport, CT: Bergin and Garvey. Camilleri, E. (2006) Towards Developing an Organisational Commitment Public Service Motivation Model for the Maltese Public Service Employees , Public Policy and Administration 21(1): 6383. Camilleri, E. (2007) Antecedents Affecting Public Service Motivation, Personnel Review 36(3): 35677. Castaing, S. (2006) The Effects of Psychological Contract Fulfilment and Public Service Motivation on Organizational Commitment in the French Civil Service, Public Policy and Administration 21(1): 8498. Corporate Leadership Council (2002) Building the High-performance Workforce: A Quantitative Analysis of the Effectiveness of Performance Management Strategies. Washington, DC: Corporate Leadership Council. Crewson, P.E. (1997) Public-service Motivation: Building Empirical Evidence of Incidence and Effect, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 7(4): 499518. Cummings, L.L. (1983) Organizational Effectiveness and Organizational Behavior: A Critical Perspective, in K.S. Cameron and D.A. Whetten (eds) Organizational Effectiveness. A Comparison of Multiple Models, pp. 187203. New York: Academic Press. Deci, E.L. and Ryan, R.M. (1985) Intrinsic Motivation and Self-determination in Human Behavior. New York: Plenum Press. Delaney, J.T. and Huselid, M.A. (1996) The Impact of Human Resource Management Practices on

Perceptions of Organizational Performance , The Academy of Management Journal 39(4): 94969. Diekmann, A. (2002) Empirische Sozialforschung: Grundlagen, Methoden, Anwendungen, 9th edn. Reinbek b. Hamburg: Rowohlt. Eisenhardt, K.M. (1985) Control: Organizational and Economic Approaches, Management Science 31(2): 13449. Etzioni, A. (1964) Modern Organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Frank, S.A. (2004) Government Employees, American Review of Public Administration 34(1): 3651. Frey, B.S. (1997) Not Just for the Money: An Economic Theory of Personnel Motivation. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing. Frey, B.S. and Jegen, R. (2001) Motivation Crowding Theory, Journal of Economic Surveys 15(5): 589611. Gabris, G.T. and Simo, G. (1995) Public Sector Motivation as an Independent Variable Affecting Career Decisions, Public Personnel Management 24(1): 3351. Gross, E. and Etzioni, A. (1985) Organizations in Society. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Gruening, G. (2001) Origin and Theoretical Basis of New Public Management, International Public Management Journal 4: 125. Hennessey, T.J.J. (1998) Reinventing Government: Does Leadership Make the Difference?, Public Administration Review 58(6): 52232. Herzberg, F. (1966) Work and the Nature of Man. Cleveland, OH: World Publishing. Hood, C. (1991) A Public Management for all Seasons?, Public Administration 69(1): 319. Horton, S. (2006) The Public Service Ethos in the British Civil Service: An Historical Institutional Analysis, Public Policy and Administration 21(1): 3248. Horton, S. (2008) History and Persistence of an Idea and an Ideal, in J.L. Perry and A. Hondeghem (eds) Motivation in Public Management: The Call of Public Service, pp. 1732. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Horton, S. and Hondeghem, A. (2006) Public Service Motivation and Commitment, Public Policy and Administration 21(1): 112. House, R.J. (1971) A Path Goal Theory of Leader Effectiveness , Administrative Science Quarterly 16(3): 32139. House, R.J. (1996) Path-goal Theory of Leadership: Lessons, Legacy, and a Reformulated Theory , The Leadership Quarterly 7(3): 32352. House, R.J., Filley, A.C. and Kerr, S. (1971) Relation of Leader Consideration and Initiating Structure to R and D Subordinates Satisfaction, Administrative Science Quarterly 16(1): 1930. Houston, D.J. (2000) Public-service Motivation: A Multivariate Test, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 10(4): 71327. Judge, T.A., Thoresen, C.J., Bono, J.E. and Patton, G.K. (2001) The Job SatisfactionJob Performance Relationship: A Qualitative and Quantitative Review, Psychological Bulletin 127(3): 376407. Judge, T.A., Piccolo, R.F. and Ilies, R. (2004) The Forgotten Ones? The Validity of Consideration and Initiating Structure in Leadership Reserach, Journal of Applied Psychology 89(1): 3651. Kalleberg, A.L., Knoke, D., Marsden, P.V. and Spaeth, J.L. (1996) Organisations in America: Analysing their Structures and Human Resource Practices. Thousand Oaks, CA, London and New Delhi: Sage. Kim, S. (2005) Individual-level Factors and Organizational Performance in Government Organizations, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 15(2): 24561. Knoke, D. and Wright-Isak, C. (1982) Individual Motives and Organizational Incentive Systems, Research in the Sociology of Organizations 1: 20954. Kristof, A.L. (1996) PersonOrganization Fit: An Integrative Review of its Conceptualizations, Measurements, and Implications, Personnel Psychology 49(1): 149. Latham, G.P., Erez, M. and Locke, E.A. (1988) Resolving Scientific Disputes by the Joint Design of Crucial Experiments by the Antagonists: Application to the ErezLatham Dispute Regarding Participation in Goal Setting, Journal of Applied Psychology 73(4): 75372. Likert, R.L. (1961) The Human Organization. New York: McGraw-Hill. Locke, E.A. (1976) The Nature and Cause of Job Satisfaction, in M.D. Dunnette (ed.) Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, pp. 1297349. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.

Locke, E.A. and Latham, G.P. (1990) A Theory of Goal-setting and Task Performance. Engelwood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. McGregor, D. (1960) The Human Side of Enterprise. New York, Toronto, London. March, J.G. and Simon, H.A. (1958) Organizations: Its Management and Value, 6th edn. 1965. New York: McGraw-Hill. Mathieu, J.E. and Zajac, D.M. (1990) A Review and Meta-analysis of the Antecedents, Correlates, and Consequences of Organizational Commitment, Psychological Bulletin 108(2): 17194. Matiaske, W. and Weller, I. (2003) Extra-Rollenverhalten, in A. Martin (ed.) Organizational Behaviour: Verhalten in Organisationen, pp. 95114. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer. Mayo, E. (1933) The Human Problems of an Industrial Civilization. New York: The Macmillan Co. Meyer, J.P. and Allen, N.J. (1991) A Three-component Conceptualization of Organizational Commitment, Human Resource Management Review 1: 6189. Meyer, J.P., Paunonen, S.V., Gellatly, I.R., Goffin, R.D. and Jackson, D.N. (1989) Organizational Commitment and Job Performance: Its the Nature of the Commitment that Counts, Journal of Applied Psychology 17: 71733. Meyer, K.J. and OToole, L. (2002) Public Management and Performance. The Impact of Managerial Quality, Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 21: 62943. Meyer, R. and Hammerschmid, G. (2006) Public Management Reform: An Identity Project, Public Policy and Administration 21(1): 99115. Miles, R.H. and Petty, M.M. (1977) Leader Effectiveness in Small Bureaucracies, The Academy of Management Journal 20(2): 23850. Mowday, R.T., Steers, R.M. and Porter, L.W. (1979) The Measurement of Organizational Commitment, Journal of Vocational Behavior 14: 2247. Mowday, R.T., Porter, L.W. and Steers, R.M. (1982) EmployeeOrganization Linkages: The Psychology of Commitment, Absenteeism, and Turnover. New York: Academic Press. Moynihan, D.P. (2008) The Normative Model in Decline? Public Service Motivation in the Age of Governance, in J.L. Perry and A. Hondeghem (eds) Motivation in Public Management: The Call of Public Service, pp. 24867. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Moynihan, D.P. and Pandey, S.K. (2005) Testing a Model of Public Sector Performance: How does Management Matter? Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 15(3): 42139. Moynihan, D.P. and Pandey, S.K. (2007) The Role of Organizations in Fostering Public Service Motivation, Public Administration Review 67(1): 4053. Muchinsky, P.M. and Monahan, C.J. (1987) What is PersonEnvironment Congruence? Supplementary versus Complementary Models of Fit , Journal of Vocational Behavior 31(3): 26877. Naff, K.C. and Crum, J. (1999) Working for America: Does Public Service Motivation Make a Difference?, Review of Public Personnel Administration 19(4): 516. Niskanen, W.A. (1971) Bureaucracy and Representative Government. Chicago, IL: Aldine Atherton. OECD (2005) Performance-related Pay Policies for Government Employees. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Ouchi, W.G. (1979) A Conceptual Framework for the Design of Organizational Control Mechanisms, Management Science 25(9): 83348. Paarlberg, L.E., Perry, J.L. and Hondeghem, A. (2008) From Theory to Practice: Strategies for Applying Public Service Motivation, in J.L. Perry and A. Hondeghem (eds) Motivation in Public Management: The Call of Public Service, pp. 26893. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Pandey, S.K. and Scott, P.G. (2002) Red Tape: A Review and Assessment of Concepts and Measures, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 12(4): 55380. Pandey, S.K., Coursey, D.H. and Moynihan, D.P. (2007) Organizational Effectiveness and Bureaucratic Red Tape, Public Performance and Management Review 30(3): 398425. Park, S.M. and Rainey, H.G. (2008) Leadership and Public Service Motivation in US Federal Agencies, International Public Management Journal 11(1): 10942. Parkinson, C.N. (1957) Parkinsons Law. Cambridge: The Riverside Press. Perry, J.L. (1996) Measuring Public Service Motivation: An Assessment of Construct Reliability and Validity, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 6(1): 522. Perry, J.L. and Vandenabeele, W. (2008) Behavioral Dynamics: Institutions, Identities, and Self-

regulation, in J.L. Perry and A. Hondeghem (eds) Motivation in Public Management: The Call of Public Service, pp. 5679. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Perry, J.L. and Wise, L.R. (1990) The Motivational Bases of Public Service, Public Administration Review 50(3): 36773. Perry, J.L., Mesch, D. and Paarlberg, L. (2006) Motivating Employees in a New Governance Era: The Performance Paradigm Revisited, Public Administration Review 66(4): 50514. Pfeffer, J. and Salancik, G.R. (2003) The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective. Stanford, CT: Stanford University Press. Pollitt, C. (2005) Decentralization: A Central Concept in Contemporary Public Management The Oxford Handbook of Public Management, pp. 37197. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Pollitt, C. (2007) Convergence or Divergence: What has been Happening in Europe?, in C. Pollitt, S. Van Thiel and V. Homburg (eds) New Public Management in Europe: Adaptation and Alternatives, pp. 1025. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Pollitt, C. and Bouckaert, G. (2004) Public Management Reform: A Comparative Analysis, 2nd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Popovich, M.G. (1998) Creating High Performance Organizations. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Powell, T.C. (1992) Organizational Alignment as Competitive Advantage, Strategic Management Journal 13: 11934. Rainey, H.G. (1979) Perceptions of Incentives in Business and Government: Implications for Civil Service Reform, Public Administration Review 39(5): 4408. Rainey, H.G. (1982) Reward Preferences among Public and Private Managers: In Search of the Service Ethic, American Review of Public Administration 16(4): 288302. Rainey, H.G. (1989) Public Management: Recent Research on the Political Context and Managerial Roles, Structures, and Behaviors, Journal of Management 15(2): 22950. Rainey, H.G. (1993) Toward a Theory of Goal Ambiguity in Public Organizations, in J.L. Perry (ed.) Research in Public Administration, Vol. 2. Greenwich, CN: JAI Press. Rainey, H.G. and Steinbauer, P. (1999) Galloping Elephants: Developing Elements of a Theory of Effective Government Organizations, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 9(1): 132. Ritz, A. (2003) Evaluation von New Public Management: Grundlagen und empirische Ergebnisse der Bewertung von Verwaltungsreformen in der Schweizerischen Bundesverwaltung. Bern, Stuttgart, Wien: Haupt. Roethlisberger, F.J. (1959) Management and Morale. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Romzek, B.S. (1990) Employee Investment and Commitment: The Ties that Bind, Public Administration Review 50(3): 57482. Ryan, R.M. and Connell, J.P. (1989) Perceived Locus of Causality and Internalization: Examining Reasons for Acting in Two Domains, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 57(5): 74961. Schedler, K. (2003) And Politics? Public Management Developments in the Light of Two Rationalities, Public Management Review 5(4): 53350. Spector, P.E. (1994) Using Self-report Questionnaires in OB Research: A Comment on the Use of a Controversial Method, Journal of Organizational Behavior 15: 38592. Steers, R.M. (1975) Problems in the Measurement of Organizational Effectiveness, Administrative Science Quarterly 20(4): 54658. Steijn, B. and Leisink, P. (2006) Organizational Commitment among Dutch Public Sector Employees, International Review of Administrative Sciences 72(2): 187201. Taylor, J. (2008) Organizational Influences, Public Service Motivation and Work Outcomes: An Australian Study, International Public Management Journal 11(1): 6788. Thompson, J.R. (2000) Reinvention as Reform: Assessing the National Performance Review, Public Administration Review 60(6): 50821. Vandenabeele, W. (2007) Toward a Public Administration Theory of Public Service Motivation: An Institutional Approach, Public Management Review 9(4): 54556. Vandenabeele, W. and Van der Walle, S. (2008) International Differences in Public Service Motivation: Comparing Regions across the World, in J.L. Perry and A. Hondeghem (eds) Motivation in Public Management: The Call of Public Service, pp. 22344. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Vandenabeele, W., Scheepers, S. and Hondeghem, A. (2006) Public Service Motivation in an International Comparative Perspective: The UK and Germany, Public Policy and Administration 21(1): 1331. Van Wart, M. (2005) Dynamics of Leadership in Public Service: Theory and Practice. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe. Von Rosenstiel, L. (2007) Grundlagen der Organisationspsychologie, 6th edn. Stuttgart: SchfferPoeschel. Walker, R.M. and Boyne, G.A. (2006) Public Management Reform and Organizational Performance: An Empirical Assessment of the UK Labour Governments Public Service Improvement Strategy, Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 25(2): 37193. Wall, T.D., Michie, J., Patterson, M., Wood, S.J., Sheehan, M., Clegg, C.W. and West, M. (2004) On the Validity of Subjective Measures of Company Performance, Personnel Psychology 57(1): 95118. Wright, B.E. (2004) The Role of Work Context in Work Motivation: A Public Sector Application of Goal and Social Cognitive Theories, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 14(1): 5978. Wright, B.E. (2007) Public Service and Motivation: Does Mission Matter?, Public Administration Review 67(1): 5464. Yousef, D.A. (2000) Organizational Commitment: A Mediator of the Relationships of Leadership Behavior with Job Satisfaction and Performance in a Non-Western Country, Journal of Managerial Psychology 15(1): 628.

53 Full

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

53 Full

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Review of Administrative Sciences

International Institute of Administrative Sciences

Downloaded from ras.sagepub.com at National School of Political on January 17, 2013

>> Version of Record - Mar 9, 2009 What is This?

Downloaded from ras.sagepub.com at National School of Political on January 17, 2013

International Review of Administrative Sciences

Downloaded from ras.sagepub.com at National School of Political on January 17, 2013

54 International Review of Administrative Sciences 75(1)

Downloaded from ras.sagepub.com at National School of Political on January 17, 2013

Ritz Public service motivation in Switzerland 55

2. Public service motivation

56 International Review of Administrative Sciences 75(1)

3. Motivation, attitudes and performance

Ritz Public service motivation in Switzerland 57

58 International Review of Administrative Sciences 75(1)

Ritz Public service motivation in Switzerland 59

4. Institutional factors and performance

60 International Review of Administrative Sciences 75(1)

Ritz Public service motivation in Switzerland 61

5. Data and method

62 International Review of Administrative Sciences 75(1)

Downloaded from ras.sagepub.com at National School of Political on January 17, 2013

Ritz Public service motivation in Switzerland 63

Downloaded from ras.sagepub.com at National School of Political on January 17, 2013

64 International Review of Administrative Sciences 75(1)

Table 1 Bivariate correlations and reliabilities

Interitem correlations (Item No.) 6 7 8 9 10

Ritz Public service motivation in Switzerland 65

6. Findings and discussion

Downloaded from ras.sagepub.com at National School of Political on January 17, 2013

66 International Review of Administrative Sciences 75(1)

.018 .009 .017 .009 .009 .015 .019 .018

.3590 .2423 .0000 .0000 .9843 .0000 .0000 .0000

.007 .011 .029 .117 .000 .051 .036 .044

68 International Review of Administrative Sciences 75(1)

Ritz Public service motivation in Switzerland 69

70 International Review of Administrative Sciences 75(1)

Ritz Public service motivation in Switzerland 71

Downloaded from ras.sagepub.com at National School of Political on January 17, 2013

72 International Review of Administrative Sciences 75(1)

Downloaded from ras.sagepub.com at National School of Political on January 17, 2013

Ritz Public service motivation in Switzerland 73

Downloaded from ras.sagepub.com at National School of Political on January 17, 2013

74 International Review of Administrative Sciences 75(1)

Downloaded from ras.sagepub.com at National School of Political on January 17, 2013

Ritz Public service motivation in Switzerland 75

Downloaded from ras.sagepub.com at National School of Political on January 17, 2013

76 International Review of Administrative Sciences 75(1)

Downloaded from ras.sagepub.com at National School of Political on January 17, 2013

Ritz Public service motivation in Switzerland 77

Downloaded from ras.sagepub.com at National School of Political on January 17, 2013

78 International Review of Administrative Sciences 75(1)

Downloaded from ras.sagepub.com at National School of Political on January 17, 2013

You might also like