The Senior Executive Service, created by the 1978 Civil Service Reform Act, envisioned a more dynamic, entrepreneurial federal government. The federal government implemented recognition and pay-for-performance objectives to guide this transformation. Using data from the 1989 Merit Principles Survey, this study examines the attitudes that SESer's hold on its success. While those exhibiting higher levels of extrinsic motivation and more acceptance of performance appraisal judge CSRA somewhat more successful, neither intrinsic motivation nor job satisfaction apparently affects these views. Nor do those deemed "high fliers" among SES members exhibit strong attitudes on CSRA success.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bellone, C. J.
(1982). Structural vs. behavioral change: The Civil Service Reform Act of 1978. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 2(2) (Spring), 59-67.
2.
Carroll, J. D.
(1995). The rhetoric of reform and political reality in the National Performance Review. Public Administration Review, 55(3) (May/June), 302-312.
3.
Colby, P. W.
, & Ingraham, P. W. (1981). Civil service reform: The views of the Senior Executive Service. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 1(3) (Summer), 75-89.
4.
Daley, D. M.
(1987). Merit pay enters with a whimper: The initial federal civil service reform experience. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 7(2) (Spring), 72-79.
5.
Daley, D. M.
(1990). The Civil Service Reform Act and performance appraisal: A research note on federal employee perceptions. Public Personnel Management, 19(3) (Fall), 245-251.
6.
Daley, D. M.
(1992a). When bureaucrats get the blues: A replication and extension of the Rusbult and Lowery analysis of federal employee responses to job dissatisfaction. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 2(3) (July), 233-246.
7.
Daley, D. M.
(1992b). Performance appraisal in the public sector: Techniques and applications. Westport, CT: Quorum.
8.
DeVader, C. L.
, Bateson, A. G., & Lord, R. G. (1986). Attribution theory: A meta-analysis of attributional hypotheses. In E. A. Locke (Ed.), Generalizing from laboratory to field studies (pp. 63-81). Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
9.
Gaertner, K.
, & Gaertner, G. H. (1984). Performance evaluation and merit pay results in the Environmental Protection Agency and Mine Safety and Health Administration. In P. Ingraham & C. Ban (Eds.), Legislating bureaucratic change (pp. 87-112). Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
10.
Green, S. G.
, & Mitchell, T. R. (1979). Attribution processes of leaders in leader—member interactions. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 23(3), 429-458.
11.
Guy, M. E.
(1993). Three steps forward, two steps backward: The status of women's integration into public management. Public Administration Review, 53(4) (July/August), 285-292.
12.
Hammond, B. R.
(1993). The uneasy partnership: The Senior Executive Service and political executives in American public agencies. Paper presented at the American Society for Public Administration National Training Conference, San Francisco, CA.
13.
Herzberg, F.
(1966). Work and the nature of man. Cleveland, OH: World Publishing.
14.
Hirschman, A.
(1970). Exit, voice, and loyalty: Responses to decline in firms, organizations and states. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Press.
15.
Huddleston, M. W.
(1987). The government's managers: Report of the Twentieth Century Fund Task Force on the Senior Executive Service. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
16.
Huddleston, M. W.
(1988-1989). Is the SES a higher civil service?Policy Studies Journal, 17(2) (Winter), 406-419.
17.
Iaffaldano, M. T.
, & Muchinsky, P. M. (1985). Job satisfaction and job performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 97 (March), 251-273.
18.
Ingraham, P.
(1993). Of pigs in pokes and policy diffusion: Another look at pay-for-performance. Public Administration Review, 53(4) (July/August), 348-356.
19.
Ingraham, P.
, & Ban, C. (Eds.). (1984). Legislating bureaucratic change: The Civil Service Reform Act of 1978. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
20.
Ingraham, P.
, & Colby, P. (1982). Individual motivation and institutional changes under the Senior Executive Service. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 2(2) (Spring), 101-118.
21.
Ingraham, P.
, & Rosenbloom, D. (Eds.). (1992). The promise and paradox of civil service reform. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.
22.
Kaufman, H.
(1960). The forest rangerBaltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
23.
Kellough, J. E.
, & Lu, H. (1993). The paradox of merit pay in the public sector. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 13(2) (Spring), 45-64.
24.
Khademian, A. M.
(1995). Reinventing a government corporation: Professional priorities and a clear bottom line. Public Administration Review, 55(1) (January/February), 17-28.
25.
Kramer, K.
(1982). Seeds of success and failure: Policy development and implementation of the 1978 Civil Service Reform Act. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 2(2) (Spring), 5-20.
26.
Lane, L. M.
(1994). Public sector performance management: Old failures and new opportunities. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 14(3) (Summer), 26-44.
27.
Lewis, G. B.
(1988). Progress toward racial and sexual equality in the federal civil service?Public Administration Review, 48(3) (May/June), 700-707.
28.
Lynn, N. B.
, & Vaden, R.E. (1979). Bureaucratic response to civil service reform. Public Administration Review, 39(4) (July/August), 333-343.
29.
Lynn, N.
, & Vaden, R. E. (1980). Federal executives: Initial reaction to change. Administration & Society12(1) (May), 101-120.
30.
Marzotto, T.
(1986). The Senior Executive Service: The balance between responsiveness and capacity. Paper presented at the American Political Science Association Annual Meeting, Washington, DC.
31.
Marzotto, T.
(1993). Wither the generalist manager: Reinventing the Senior Executive Service. Paper presented at the American Political Science Association Annual Meeting, Washington, DC.
32.
Meyer, H. H.
(1991). A solution to the performance appraisal feedback engima. Academy of Management Executive, 5(1) (February), 68-76.
33.
Milkovich, G.
, & Wigdor, A. (Eds.). (1991). Pay for performance: Evaluating performance appraisal and merit payWashington, DC: National Academy Press.
34.
Mohrman, A. M., Jr.
, Resnick-West, S., & Lawler, E. E., III. (1989). Designing performance appraisal systems: Aligning appraisals and organizational realities. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
35.
Mosher, F. C.
(1982). Democracy and the public service (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
36.
Naff, K. C.
(1993). Perceptions of the glass ceiling: The nature of subjective discrimination in the federal government. Paper presented at the American Political Science Association Annual Meeting.
37.
Newland, C. A.
(1988). The American Senior Executive Service: old ideals and new realities. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 54(2), 625-660.
38.
Nigro, L. G.
(1981). Attitudes of federal employees toward performance appraisal and merit pay: Implication for CSRA implementation. Public Administration Review, 41(1) (January/February), 84-86.
39.
Nigro, L.
(1982). CSRA performance appraisals and merit pay: Growing uncertainty in the federal work force. Public Administration Review, 42(4) (July/August), 371-375.
40.
O'Toole, D. E.
, & Churchill, J. R. (1982). Implementing pay-for-performance: Initial experiences. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 2(3) (Summer), 13-28.
41.
Pagano, M. A.
(1984). The SES performance management system and bonus awards. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 4(2) (Spring), 40-56.
42.
Pearce, J. L.
, & Perry, J. L. (1983). Federal merit pay: A longitudinal analysis. Public Administration Review, 43(4) (July/August), 315-325.
43.
Pearce, J. L.
, Stevenson, W., & Perry, J. L. (1985). Managerial compensation based on organizational performance: A time series analysis of the impact of merit pay. Academy of Management Journal, 28(2) (June), 261-278.
44.
Perry, J. L.
(1986). Merit pay in the public sector: The case for a failure of theory. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 7(1) (Fall), 57-69.
45.
Perry, J. L.
, Hanzlik, C., & Pearce, J. L. (1982). Effectiveness of merit-pay-pool management. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 2(3) (Summer), 5-12.
46.
Perry, J. L.
, Petrakis, B. A., & Miller, T. K. (1989). Federal merit pay, round II: An analysis of the performance management and recognition system. Public Administration Review, 49(1) (January/February), 29-37.
47.
Rosen, B.
(1986). Crises in the U.S. Civil Service. Public Administration Review, 46(3) (May/June), 207-214.
48.
Rusbult, C. E.
, Farrell, D., Rogers, G., & Mainous, A. G., III. (1988). Impact of exchange variables on exit, voice, loyalty, and neglect: An integrative model of responses to declining job satisfaction. Academy of Management Journal, 31(3) (September), 559-627.
49.
Rusbult, C. E.
& Lowery, D. (1985). When bureaucrats get the blues: Responses to dissatisfaction among federal employees. Journal of Applied Social Psychology15(1), 80-103.
50.
U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board [U.S. MSPB]
. (1988). Toward effective performance management in the federal government. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office (July).
51.
U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board [U.S. MSPB]
. (1990). Working for America: A federal employee survey. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office (June).
52.
U.S. Office of Personnel Management
. (1980). Federal employee attitudes; phase 1: Baseline survey, 1979. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office (March).
53.
U.S. Office of Personnel Management
. (1983). Federal employee attitudes; phase 2: Follow-up survey, 1980. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
54.
U.S. Office of Personnel Management
. (1984). Federal employee attitude survey; phase 3, 1983: Preliminary report. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office (February).
55.
Vroom, V.
(1964). Work and motivation. New York: John Wiley.
