The role of administrative discretion in the coping behaviour of street-level bureaucrats in higher education institutions of Pakistan

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.47264/idea.jhsms/5.1.8

Keywords:

Policy implementation, Coping behaviour, Street-level bureaucrats, Semester system policy, Coping technique, Discretionary power, Coping mechanism

Abstract

Policies are created at the highest level, and street-level bureaucrats (SLBs) implement them at lower levels. SLBs work directly with citizens and exercise significant discretion in their service. According to Lipsky's theory, SLBs face various problems and use multiple coping techniques to deal with them. This study focused on the discretionary powers of the heads of departments (HODs) and the use of coping mechanisms when faced with challenges in enacting the semester system policy. The existing study used the theoretical model of coping mechanisms using a single-case research methodology to investigate the HODs of a prestigious public university's coping behaviour in implementing the semester system. Semi-structured interviews were employed to get the perspectives of HODs in this qualitative research. This study used the classification model of coping families developed by Tummers, Bekkers, Vink, and Michael (2015) and concludes that management has given HODs some task-discretionary authority for carrying out the semester system policy based on thematic analysis. The findings reveal that HODs move against the students rather than towards or away from them in coping behaviour. HODs strictly follow the semester system's policy by adhering to rigid rule-following.

References

Afni, T. N. A. (2024). Problematika Pembelajaran Fiqih Di Kelas Iv Mis Darul Ihsan Sepinggan Pasca Kebakaran Tahun Pelajaran 2022/2023. Lunggi Journal, 2(2), 297-306.

Angervil, G. (2017). Administrative discretion in public policy implementation: the case of no child left behind (NCLB): Florida Atlantic University.

Barling, J., Rogers, A. G., & Kelloway, E. K. (2001). Behind closed doors: in-home workers' experience of sexual harassment and workplace violence. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 6(3), 255. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8998.6.3.255 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037//1076-8998.6.3.255

Birkland, T. A. (2015). An introduction to the policy process: Theories, concepts, and models of public policy making: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351023948 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351023948

Brodkin, E. Z. (2012). Reflections on street?level bureaucracy: past, present, and future. Public Administration Review, 72(6), 940-949. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2012.02657.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2012.02657.x

Bryman, A. (2016). Social research methods. Oxford University.

Cerna, L. (2013). The nature of policy change and implementation: a review of different theoretical approaches. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) report, 492–502.

Cooper, M. J., Sornalingam, S., & O’Donnell, C. (2015). Street-level bureaucracy: an underused theoretical model for general practice? Br J Gen Pract, 65(636), 376–377. https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp15X685921 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp15X685921

DeLeon, P., & DeLeon, L. (2002). What ever happened to policy implementation? an alternative approach. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 12(4), 467-492. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a003544 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a003544

Edwards, G. C. (1980). Implementing public policy. Congressional Quarterly Press.

Ellis, K. (2011). Street?level bureaucracy revisited: the changing face of frontline discretion in adult social care in England. Social Policy and Administration, 45(3), 221-244. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9515.2011.00766.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9515.2011.00766.x

Evans, T., & Harris, J. (2004). Street-level bureaucracy, social work and the (exaggerated) death of discretion. The British Journal of Social Work, 34(6), 871–895. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bch106 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bch106

Fox, C. J. (1987). Biases in public policy implementation evaluation. Review of Policy Research, 7(1), 128–141. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-1338.1987.tb00033.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-1338.1987.tb00033.x

Gibbs, G. R. (2007). Thematic coding and categorizing. Analyzing Qualitative Data, 703, 38–56. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781849208574.n4

Gilson, L. (2015). Michael Lipsky,' Street-level bureaucracy: dilemmas of the Individual in Public Service'. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199646135.013.19 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199646135.013.19

Gull, M., Parveen, S., & Sridadi, A. R. (2023). Resilient higher educational institutions in a world of digital transformation. foresight. https://doi.org/10.1108/FS-12-2022-0186 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/FS-12-2022-0186

Hadna, A. H., Listyaningsih, U., & Ihwanudin, I. (2022). To what extent have street-level bureaucrats used their discretionary powers during the COVID-19 pandemic in Indonesia? International Journal of Public Sector Management(ahead-of-print). https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPSM-12-2021-0272 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPSM-12-2021-0272

Hassan, S., Ansari, N., & Rehman, A. (2022). An exploratory study of workplace spirituality and employee well-being affecting public service motivation: an institutional perspective. Qualitative Research Journal, 22(2), 209–235. https://doi.org/10.1108/QRJ-07-2021-0078 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/QRJ-07-2021-0078

Hassan, S., Fiaz, M., & Asif, R. (2021). Public service motivation and quality of working life in public institutions: analyzing the moderating role of po fit. Journal of Management and Research, 8(2), 159-181. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29145/jmr/82/06

Hershcovis, M. S., & Reich, T. C. (2013). Integrating workplace aggression research: relational, contextual, and method considerations. Journal of organizational behavior, 34(S1), S26-S42. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1886 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1886

Hill, M., & Hupe, P. (2002). Implementing public policy: Governance in theory and in practice: Sage.

Jadoon, J., Jabeen, N., & Zeba, F. (2008). Towards effective implementation of semester system in Pakistan: Lessons from Punjab University. Paper presented at the 2nd International Conference on Assessing Quality in Higher Education, 1-3 December, 2008.

Lipsky, M. (1980). Dilemmas of the individual in public services. Sage Foundation.

Lipsky, M. (2010). Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public service. Sage Foundation.

Lipsky, M. (2022). A note on pursuing work on street?level bureaucracy in developing and transitional countries. Public Administration and Development, 42(1), 11–11. https://doi.org/10.1002/pad.1969 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/pad.1969

Maguire, M., & Delahunt, B. (2017). Doing a thematic analysis: A practical, step-by-step guide for learning and teaching scholars. AISHE-J: The All Ireland Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 9(3), 77-90.

Matland, R. E. (1995). Synthesizing the implementation literature: the ambiguity-conflict model of policy implementation. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 5(2), 145-174. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a037242 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a037242

Maynard-Moody, S., & Musheno, M. (2000). State agent or citizen agent: two narratives of discretion. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10(2), 329–358. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a024272 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a024272

Mikkelsen, K. S., Madsen, J. K., & Baekgaard, M. (2023). Is stress among street?level bureaucrats associated with experiences of administrative burden among clients? A multilevel study of the Danish unemployment sector. Public Administration Review. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13673 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13673

Mohammed, A. R. (2022). Discretion on the frontlines of the implementation of the Ghana School Feeding Programme: Street?Level Bureaucrats Adapting to Austerity in Northern Ghana. Public Administration and Development, 42(1), 33–43. https://doi.org/10.1002/pad.1905 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/pad.1905

Mutereko, S., & Chitakunye, P. (2015). Discretion and autonomy: public administrators dilemmas in the implementation of national curriculum statements. International Journal of Public Administration, 38(2), 143-155. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2014.934835 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2014.934835

Perry, J. L. (1996). Measuring public service motivation: An assessment of construct reliability and validity. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 6(1), 5-22. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a024303 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a024303

Powell, D. C., Stout, M., Naylor, L. A., Wilson, L. A., Infeld, D. L., Wenzhao, L., . . . Frasco, J. (2009). JPAE. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 15(3).

Rahman, T. P. M. A. (2013). Perception of students and teachers towards semester system: a study in some selected degree colleges of Nagaon Town of Nagaon district of Assam. Perception, 4(1), 47-60.

Reddick, C. G., Abdelsalam, H. M., & Elkadi, H. (2011). The influence of E?Government on administrative discretion: The case of local governments in Egypt. Public Administration and Development, 31(5), 390-407. https://doi.org/10.1002/pad.615 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/pad.615

Schofield, J. (2001). Time for a revival? Public policy implementation: a review of the literature and an agenda for future research. International Journal of Management Reviews, 3(3), 245-263. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2370.00066 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2370.00066

Scott, P. G. (1997). Assessing determinants of bureaucratic discretion: An experiment in street-level decision making. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 7(1), 35-58. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a024341 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a024341

Shapiro, M. (1983). Administrative discretion: The next stage. The Yale Law Journal, 92(8), 1487-1522. https://doi.org/10.2307/796185 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/796185

Singh, V. K., & Kumar, P. (2016). Challenges in implementation of semester system in globalized world. International journal of applied research, 2(3), 89-91.

Sitopu, J. W., Khairani, M., Roza, M., Judijanto, L., & Aslan, A. (2024). The importance of integrating mathematical literacy in the Primary Education Curriculum: A Literature Review. International Journal of Teaching and Learning, 2(1), 121-134.

Stensöta, H. O. (2011). Political influence on street-level bureaucratic outcome: testing the interaction between bureaucratic ideology and local community political orientation. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 22(3), 553-571. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mur062 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mur062

Sultana, S., Ansari, N., & Ilyas, S. (2020). Conceptualizing the Perceived Meaning of Workplace Spirituality and Religion in Higher Education Institution. Bannu University Research Journal in Islamic Studies, 7(1), 35-46.

Taylor, I., & Kelly, J. (2006). Professionals, discretion and public sector reform in the UK: re-visiting Lipsky. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 19(7), 629-642. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513550610704662 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/09513550610704662

Tubre, T. C., & Collins, J. M. (2000). Jackson and Schuler (1985) revisited: A meta-analysis of the relationships between role ambiguity, role conflict, and job performance. Journal of Management, 26(1), 155-169. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0149-2063(99)00035-5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0149-2063(99)00035-5

Tummers, L., & Bekkers, V. (2014). Policy implementation, street-level bureaucracy, and the importance of discretion. Public Management Review, 16(4), 527-547. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2013.841978 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2013.841978

Tummers, L., Bekkers, V., Vink, E., & Michael, M. (2015). Coping during public service delivery: A conceptualized and systematic review of the Literature. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25(4), 1099-1126. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muu056 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muu056

Tummers, L., & Rocco, P. (2015). Serving clients when the server crashes: how frontline workers cope with E?government challenges. Public Administration Review, 75(6), 817-827. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12379 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12379

Tummers, L., Steijn, B., & Bekkers, V. (2012). Explaining the willingness of public professionals to implement public policies: Content, context, and personality characteristics. Public administration, 90(3), 716-736. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2011.02016.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2011.02016.x

Tummers, L., Vermeeren, B., Steijn, B., & Bekkers, V. (2012). Public professionals and policy implementation: Conceptualizing and measuring three types of role conflicts. Public Management Review, 14(8), 1041-1059. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2012.662443 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2012.662443

Ullah, H., Arshad, S., Akram, M., & Mahmood, W. (2023). Factors influencing Quality Assurance through Semester System at University Level. Voyage Journal of Educational Studies, 3(2), 17-30. https://doi.org/10.58622/vjes.v3i2.48 DOI: https://doi.org/10.58622/vjes.v3i2.48

Vedung, E. (2015). Autonomy and street-level bureaucrats’ coping strategies. Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy, 2015(2), 28643. https://doi.org/10.3402/nstep.v1.28643 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3402/nstep.v1.28643

Winter, S. C. (2002). Explaining street-level bureaucratic behaviour in social and regulatory policies. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association in Boston.

Wong, L. (2008). Data analysis in qualitative research: A brief guide to using NVivo. Malaysian Family Physician: The official journal of the Academy of Family Physicians of Malaysia, 3(1), 14-24.

Wright, B. E., Moynihan, D. P., & Pandey, S. K. (2012). Pulling the levers: transformational leadership, public service motivation, and mission valence. Public Administration Review, 72(2), 206-215. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2011.02496.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2011.02496.x

Yin, R. (2003a). K.(2003). Case study research: design and methods. Sage Publications.

Yin, R. K. (2003b). Case Study Research. Sage Publications.

Yousaf, A., & Hashim, M. (2012). A case study of annual and semester systems of examination on government college of management sciences, Peshawar, Pakistan. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 2(9), 53-60.

Zarychta, A., Grillos, T., & Andersson, K. P. (2020). Public sector governance reform and the motivation of street?level bureaucrats in developing countries. Public Administration Review, 80(1), 75-91. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13132 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13132

Published

2024-05-15

How to Cite

Naqvi, S. H. B., Salman, Y., Hassan, S., Gull, M., & Capraz, K. (2024). The role of administrative discretion in the coping behaviour of street-level bureaucrats in higher education institutions of Pakistan. Journal of Humanities, Social and Management Sciences (JHSMS), 5(1), 135–159. https://doi.org/10.47264/idea.jhsms/5.1.8

Issue

Section

Research Articles