It is dysfunctional for most street-level bureaucracies to become more responsive

Evidence

It is for this reason that we conclude that stated intentions of street-level bureaucracies to become more client-oriented, to receive more citizen input, and t~ encourage clients to speak out are often questionable, no matter how sincere the administrators who articulate these fine goals. It is dysfunctional to most street-level bureaucracies to become more responsive. … Increases in client demands at one point will only lead to mechanisms to ration services further at another point, assuming sources remain unchanged. — Michael Lipsky, Street-Level Bureaucracy, 745

Categorization

• XREF: Directly serves this reader’s stated test — that front-line bureaucracy institutionalizes demand-suppression faster than cultural narratives change. The ‘it is dysfunctional to become more responsive’ claim is the structural mechanism that makes routinization outpace culture. — connects to: Public-service ethics force agencies to expand volume instead of improving quality; Public agencies knowingly accept the demand-rationing implications of their actions — Michael Lipsky, Street-Level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of…, 767; Street-level bureaucrats are frontline workers exercising substantial job discretion (+1 more)

Broader Connections

• Increased professionalism sometimes narrows rather than widens frontline discretion #corroborates (0.85) — Michael Lipsky, Street-Level Bureaucracy, 1844