As an extension of the existing literature on span-of-control relationships, we propose that public bureaucracies are typically faced with multiple goals creating potential conflicts due to structural choices. In other words, optimal span of control for one goal may not be optimal for another. Findings from an analysis of nearly 600 public bureaucracies provide some evidence that structural changes designed to improve performance on one goal may hinder performance on others. The results from our analysis also demonstrate a functional form for the span-of-control relationship that is very different from the one suggested by recent theoretical work.
Amrein, A. L.,& Berliner, D. C. (2002). The impact of high-stakes tests on academic performance. Tempe, AZ: Education Policy Research Unit.
2.
Baltagi, B. H. (1995). Econometric analysis of panel data. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
3.
Bohte, J., & Meier, K. (2001). Structure and the performance of public organizations: Task difficulty and span of control. Public Organization Review, 1, 341-354.
4.
Bracey, G. (1991). Who’s really winning the SAT race?School and Community, 77, 14-25.
5.
Feliciano, C. (2001). The benefits of biculturalism: Exposure to immigrant culture and dropping out of school among Asian and Latino youths. Social Science Quarterly, 82, 865- 879.
6.
Fottler, M. D. (1981). Management: Is it really generic?Academy of Management Review, 6, 1-12.
7.
Grogan, M. (2001). Positive and not-so-positive effects of preparing students to pass standards of learning tests in Virginia’s high school classrooms. NASSP Bulletin, 85, 5-14.
8.
Hayes, D. P., Wolfer, L. T.,& Wolfe, M. F. (1996). Schoolbook simplification and its relation to the decline in SAT-verbal scores. American Educational Research Journal, 33(2), 489-508.
9.
Long, S. J. (1997). Regression models for categorical and limited dependent variables. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
10.
Meier, K. J., & Bohte, J. (2000). Ode to Luther Gulick: Span of control and organizational performance. Administration & Society, 32, 115-137.
11.
Meier, K. J., & Bohte, J. (2003). Span of control and public organizations: Implementing Luther Gulick’s research design. Public Administration Review, 63(1), 61-70.
12.
Moe, T. M. (1989). The politics of bureaucratic structure. In J. E. Chubb & P. E. Peterson (Eds.), Can government govern?(pp. 267-329). Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.
13.
Moe, T. M. (1990). Political institutions—The neglected side of the story. Journal of Law Economics & Organization, 6, 213-253.
14.
Meyer, M. W. (1982). ‘Bureaucratic’ vs. ‘profit’ organization. In B. L. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior(pp. 89-126). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
15.
Owen, D. (1999). None of the above: The truth about the SATs. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
16.
Popan, L. (2001). Teaching to the test?Educational Leadership, 58, 16-20.
17.
Rainey, H. (1993). Toward a theory of goal ambiguity in public organizations. In J. L. Perry (Ed.), Research in public administration(2nd ed., pp. 121-166). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
18.
Rainey, H. (1997). Understanding and managing public organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
19.
Thomson, S. D., DeLeonibus, N., & National Association of Secondary School Principals. (1978). Guidelines for improving SAT scores. Reston, VA: National Association of Secondary School Principals.
