Dual accountability makes services responsive to clients but less controllable by agencies.

Evidence

This is a great strength and also a great weakness of the public services. It provides a measure of responsiveness to clients when the organization ofbureaucratic service tends toward neglect or rigidity. But by virtue of providing another focus of accountability it also means that street-level bureaucrats are less controllable. — Michael Lipsky, Street-Level Bureaucracy, 1173

Categorization

• DEEPTHINKING: Names the constitutive paradox of public service: the very feature that protects clients from rigid bureaucracy is the feature that makes the workforce ungovernable — responsiveness and control are inversely linked.
• XREF: connects to: Decentralized routine-setting produces more responsive client treatment than remote authority. — Michael Lipsky, Street-Level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of…, 1494; Accountability is responsive behavior, not merely answering to superiors; Professional norms subordinate agency rules to individual client needs. — Michael Lipsky, Street-Level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of…, 1172

Broader Connections

• Decentralized routine-setting produces more responsive client treatment than remote authority. #corroborates (0.85) — Michael Lipsky, Street-Level Bureaucracy, 1494
• Professional norms subordinate agency rules to individual client needs. #corroborates (0.85) — Michael Lipsky, Street-Level Bureaucracy, 1172
• Accountability is responsive behavior, not merely answering to superiors #expands (0.80)