Public agencies often use contractors to facilitate Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) discrimination complaint cases, but we know relatively little about which factors influence contracting performance of the complaint process. Drawing on contracting theories, this study examines two factors—incentive structure and contractor ownership (i.e., women-owned and small disadvantaged-owned)—that moderate the link between agency contracting use and agency performance in the discrimination complaint process. Using the agency-level panel data from multiple sources, this study finds agency contracting use facilitates the discrimination complaint process when agencies use a performance-based incentive structure. When it comes to the moderating effect of contractor ownership focused on the socially/economically underrepresented, the findings show that using small disadvantaged-owned contractors positively moderates the relationship between contracting use and performance at the agency level.
AlonsoJ. M.AndrewsR. (2016). How privatization affects public service quality: An empirical analysis of prisons in England and Wales, 1998–2012. International Public Management Journal, 19(2), 235–263. https://doi.org/10.1080/10967494.2015.1048913
2.
AmirkhanyanA. A. (2008). Privatizing public nursing homes: Examining the effects on quality and access. Public Administration Review, 68(4), 665–680. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2008.00906.x
3.
AmirkhanyanA. A. (2010). Monitoring across sectors: Examining the effect of nonprofit and for-profit contractor ownership on performance monitoring in state and local contracts. Public Administration Review, 70(5), 742–755. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2010.02202.x
4.
BaehlerK.LiuA. C.RosenbloomD. H. (2014). Mission-extrinsic public values as an extension of regime values: Examples from the United States and the People’s Republic of China. Administration & Society, 46(2), 199–219. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399713515873
5.
BauerZ.JohnstonJ. M. (2020). Who does it better? Comparing immigration detention facility performance in an intergovernmental and intersectoral context. Public Administration Review, 80, 244–258. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13127
BehnR. D.KantP. A. (1999). Strategies for avoiding the pitfalls of performance contracting. Public Productivity & Management Review, 22(4), 470. https://doi.org/10.2307/3380931
8.
BertelliA. M.SmithC. R. (2010). Relational contracting and network management. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 20, i21–i40. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20627907
9.
BinghamL. B. (1997). Mediating employment disputes: Perceptions of redress at the United States postal service. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 17(2), 20–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371x9701700203
10.
BinghamL. B.ChesmoreG.MoonY.NapoliL. M. (2000). Mediating employment disputes at the United States postal service: A comparison of in-house and outside neutral mediator models. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 20(1), 5–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X0002000102
11.
BoyneG. A. (1998). Competitive tendering in local government: A review of theory and evidence. Public Administration, 76, 695–712.
12.
BrownL. A.KelloughJ. E. (2020). Contracting and the bureaucratic representation of minorities and women: Examining evidence from Federal Agencies. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 40(3), 447–467. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X18822051
13.
BrownT. L.PotoskiM.Van SlykeD. M. (2010). Contracting for complex products. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 20(1), i41–i58. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mup034
14.
BrownT. L.PotoskiM.Van SlykeD. (2016). Managing complex contracts: A theoretical approach. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 26(2), 294–308. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muv004
15.
BrownT. L.PotoskiM.Van SlykeD. M. (2018). Complex contracting: Management challenges and solutions. Public Administration Review, 78(5), 739–747. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12959
16.
BrunjesB. M. (2019). Competition and federal contractor performance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 30(2), 202–219. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muz027
17.
BrunjesB. M.EvansD. J. (2022). Your competitive side is calling: An analysis of Florida contract performance. Public Administration Review, 82, 83–101. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13430
18.
BrunjesB. M.KelloughJ. E. (2018). Representative bureaucracy and government contracting: A further examination of evidence from federal agencies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 28, 519–534. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muy022
19.
BuchananJ. M. (2003). Public choice: Politics without romance. Policy, 19(3), 13–18.
20.
BuchananJ. M.TullockG. (1977). The expanding public sector: Wagner squared. Public Choice, 31, 147–150.
21.
ChoiI. (2020). Does contracting achieve better performance for democratic-constitutional, procedural tasks? Evidence from the EEO discrimination complaint process. The American Review of Public Administration, 50(8), 825–837. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074020919906
DavisR. S.GirthA. M.StazykE. C. (2016). Social and technical determinants of perceived contract performance: Rules, autonomy, and ethics. Public Performance and Management Review, 39(3), 728–755. https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2015.1137773
24.
DeHoogR. H. (1985). Human services contracting: Environmental, behavioral, and organizational conditions. Administration & Society, 16(4), 427–454.
25.
DeHoogR. H. (1990). Competition, negotiation, or cooperation: Three models for service contracting. Administration & Society, 22(3), 317–340.
26.
DixitA. (2002). Incentives and organizations in the public sector: An interpretative review. The Journal of Human Resources, 37(4), 696. https://doi.org/10.2307/3069614
27.
DonaldsonL.DavisJ. H. (1991). Stewardship theory or agency theory: CEO governance and shareholder returns. Australian Journal of Management, 16(1), 49–66.
28.
DurantR. F.GirthA. M.JohnstonJ. M. (2009). American exceptionalism, human resource management, and the contract state. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 29(3), 207–229. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X09335617
29.
EdelenbosJ.KlijnE. H. (2007). Trust in complex decision-making networks: A theoretical and empirical exploration. Administration and Society, 39(1), 25–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399706294460
30.
ElginD. J.CarterD. P. (2020). Higher performance with increased risk of undesirable outcomes: The dilemma of U.S. child welfare services privatization. Public Management Review, 22(11), 1603–1623. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2019.1637013
31.
ElkomyS.CooksonG.JonesS. (2019). Cheap and dirty: The effect of contracting out cleaning on efficiency and effectiveness. Public Administration Review, 79(2), 193–202. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13031
32.
FernandezS. (2004). Explaining contracting effectiveness: An empirical analysis of contracting for services among local governments. The University of Georgia.
33.
FernandezS. (2007). What works best when contracting for services? An analysis of contracting performance at the local level in the US. Public Administration, 85(4), 1119–1141. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2007.00688.x
34.
FernandezS. (2009). Understanding contracting performance: An empirical analysis. Administration and Society, 41(1), 67–100. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399708330257
35.
FernandezS.BrudneyJ. L. (2008). Exploring variations in contracting for services among American local governments: Do politics still matter?The American Review of Public Administration, 38(4), 439–462.
36.
FernandezS.MalatestaD.SmithC. R. (2013). Race, gender, and government contracting: Different explanations or new prospects for theory?Public Administration Review, 73(1), 109–120. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2012.02684.x
37.
FernandezS.SmithC. R. (2006). Looking for evidence of public employee opposition to privatization: An empirical study with implications for practice. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 26(4), 356–381. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X05281629
38.
FredericksonH. G. (1990). Public administration and social equity. Public Administration Review, 50(2), 228–237. http://www.jstor.org/stable/976870
GirthA. M. (2014). A closer look at contract accountability: Exploring the determinants of sanctions for unsatisfactory contract performance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 24(2), 317–348. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mus033
41.
GirthA. M. (2017). Incentives in third-party governance: Management practices and accountability implications. Public Administration Review, 77(3), 433–444. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12645
42.
GirthA. M.LopezL. E. (2019). Contract design, complexity, and incentives: Evidence from U.S. federal agencies. The American Review of Public Administration, 49(3), 325–337. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074018787558
43.
GladstoneW. E. (1868). Imperial parliament. [House of Commons.—Monday, March 16. State of Ireland.]. The Daily News, p. 2.
44.
HatryH. P. (2007). Performance measurement. Urban Institute Press.
45.
HeinrichC. J. (1999). Do government bureaucrats make effective use of performance management information?Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 9(3), 363–393.
46.
HeinrichC. J.ChoiY. (2007). Performance-based contracting in social welfare programs. American Review of Public Administration, 37(4), 409–435. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074006297553
47.
JensenM.MecklingW. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs, and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3, 305–360.
48.
KimY. W.BrownT. L. (2012). The importance of contract design. Public Administration Review, 72(5), 687–696. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41687982
49.
LambrightK. T. (2009). Agency theory and beyond: Contracted providers’ motivations to properly use service monitoring tools. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 19(2), 207–227. http://www.jstor.org/stable/29738943
50.
LazearE. P. (2018). Compensation and incentives in the workplace. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 32(3), 195–214. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.32.3.195
51.
LeeG. R.FernandezS.LeeS. (2021). An overlooked cost of contracting out: Evidence from employee turnover intention in U.S. federal agencies. Public Personnel Management, 50(3), 381–407. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091026020944558
52.
LeeG. R.LeeS. (2020). How outsourcing may enhance job satisfaction in the U.S. Federal Bureaucracy: Exploring the role of knowledge sharing. American Review of Public Administration, 50(4–5), 387–400. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074020913980
53.
LeeS.KingsleyG. (2009). The impact of relational factors on contracting management in public organizations. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 29(3), 270–292. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X09340397
54.
LevinJ. (2003). Relational incentive contracts. The American Economic Review, 93(3), 835–857.
LuJ. (2016). The performance of performance-based contracting in human services: A Quasi-experiment. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 26,. 277–293. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muv002
57.
MarvelM. K.MarvelH. P. (2009). Shaping the provision of outsourced public services. Public Performance & Management Review, 33(2), 183–213. https://doi.org/10.2753/pmr1530-9576330201
58.
NabatchiT.StangerA. (2013). Faster? Cheaper? Better? Using ADR to resolve federal sector EEO complaints. Public Administration Review, 73(1), 50–61. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2012.02601.x
59.
NesbitR.NabatchiT.BinghamL. B. (2012). Employees, supervisors, and workplace mediation: Experiences of justice and settlement. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 32(3), 260–287. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X12436981
60.
OberfieldZ. W. (2016). Why are some agencies perceived as more committed to diversity than others? An analysis of public-sector diversity climates. Public Management Review, 18(5), 763–790. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2015.1045017
61.
O’TooleL. J.MeierK. J. (2004). Parkinson’s law and the new public management? Contracting determinants and service-quality consequences in public education. Public Administration Review, 64(3), 342–352. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3542599
62.
PapkeL. E.WooldridgeJ. M. (1996). Econometric methods for fractional response variables with an application to 401(k) plan participation rates. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 11, 619–632.
63.
PetersenO. H.BaekkeskovE.PotoskiM.BrownT. L. (2019). Measuring and managing ex ante transaction costs in public sector contracting. Public Administration Review, 79(5), 641–650. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13048
64.
PiotrowskiS. (2007). The impact of contracting. In Governmental transparency in the path of administration reform (pp. 75–88). State University of New York Press.
65.
PiotrowskiS.RosenbloomD. H. (2002). Nonmission-based values in results-oriented public management: The case of freedom of information. Public Administration Review, 62(6), 643–657. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-6210.00247
66.
PiotrowskiS.RosenbloomD. H.KangS.IngramsA. (2018). Levels of value integration in federal agencies’ mission and value statements: Is open government a performance target of U.S. federal agencies?Public Administration Review, 78(5), 705–716. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12937
67.
PortilloS.HumphreyN.BearfieldD. A. (2022). Representative bureaucracy theory and the implicit embrace of whiteness and masculinity. Public Administration Review, 82(3), 594–597. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13477
68.
RosenbloomD. H. (2014). Federal law against age and disability discrimination meets the dignity of the states: The supreme court, states’ sovereign immunity, and judicial review. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 34(1), 23–39. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X13506623
69.
RubinE. VAlteriA. M. (2019). Discrimination complaints in the U.S. Federal Government: Reviewing progress under the no FEAR act. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 39(4), 511–522. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X17744864
70.
RubinE. V.ParkY. J.AlteriA. (2017). Understanding the link between retaliation claims and agency EEO resources in the federal government.
71.
RushC. L.KelloughJ. E. (2017). Knowledge of federal EEO law among county administrators and department heads: Examining the extent and determinants of understanding. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 37(1), 59–83. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X15616168
72.
SabharwalM.LevineH.D’AgostinoM. (2018). A conceptual content analysis of 75 years of diversity research in public administration. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 38(2), 248–267. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X16671368
73.
SclarE. (2000). You don’t always get what you pay for: The economics of privatization. Cornell University Press.
74.
SeldenS. C.SeldenF. (2001). Rethinking diversity in public organizations for the 21st century: Moving toward a multicultural model. Administration & Society, 33(3), 303–329.
75.
SmithC. R.FernandezS. (2010). Equity in federal contracting: Examining the link between minority representation and federal procurement decisions. Public Administration Review, 70(1), 87–96. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40469113
76.
United States Government Accountability Office. (2009). Equal employment opportunity: Pilot projects could help test solutions to long-standing concerns with the EEO complaint process. GAO reports. https://www.gao.gov/new.items/d09712.pdf
77.
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (2014). Annual report on the federal work force part I: EEO complaints processing.
Van SlykeD. M. (2002). The public management challenges of contracting with nonprofits for social services. International Journal of Public Administration, 25(4), 489–517. https://doi.org/10.1081/PAD-120013253
80.
Van SlykeD. M. (2007). Agents or stewards: Using theory to understand the government-nonprofit social. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 17(2), 157–187. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4139740
81.
Van SlykeD. M.HammondsC. A. (2003). The privatization decision: Do public managers make a difference?American Review of Public Administration, 33(2), 146–163. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074003251374
82.
WarsenR.KlijnE. H.KoppenjanJ. (2019). Mix and match: How contractual and relational conditions are combined in successful public-private partnerships. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 29(3), 375–393. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muy082
83.
WatermanR. W.MeierK. J. (1998). Principal-agent models: An expansion?Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 8(2), 173–202. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203871539
84.
WoodA. K.LewisD. E. (2017). Agency performance challenges and agency politicization. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 27(4), 581–595. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mux014
85.
ZeemeringE. S. (2019). Do interlocal contracts seek collaborative efficiency? An investigation of police service delivery in California cities. Public Management Review, 21(7), 968–987. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2018.1538424
