Ambiguous goals make some public jobs impossible to do properly by any standard
Evidence
Street-level bureaucrats often experience their jobs in terms of inadequate personal resources, even when part of that inadequacy is attributable to the nature of the job rather than rooted in some personal failure. Some jobs just cannot be done properly, given the ambiguity of goals and the technology of particular social services. Determining whether or not a job is “proper” is subject to uncertainties and implicit negotiation with others. (See chapter 10.) For example, there is no consensus on what techniques or approaches substantially reduce rates of criminal recidivism, although social workers, psychiatrists, and prison officials are supposed to be responsible for rehabilitating offenders. — Michael Lipsky, Street-Level Bureaucracy, 262
Categorization
- XREF: Connects to the reader’s question about how ambiguous mandates interact with discretionary judgment to institutionalize worker choices; also to why routinization proceeds faster than cultural narrative change (uncertain goals force workers to fall back on their own categories). — connects to: Ambiguous societal goals make street-level performance measurement nearly arbitrary — Michael Lipsky, Street-Level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of…, 388; Bilndly pursued goals lose their meaning because goals are defined along the way
- recurring: this claim recurs 2 times within its source
Broader Connections
- Ambiguous societal goals make street-level performance measurement nearly arbitrary
#epitomizes(0.95) — Michael Lipsky, Street-Level Bureaucracy, 388 - Bilndly pursued goals lose their meaning because goals are defined along the way
#expands(0.75)