Among the many assumptions about public management widely embraced but rarely tested is the notion that public sector managers are more averse to risk than managers in the private sector. Taking a multivariate measure of "risk culture," this study seeks to identify and to explain differences between public and private organizations. The concept of risk culture pertains to managers' perceptions that their co-workers and superiors take risks and promote risk-taking. Some of the factors examined as possible determinants of risk culture include political control, nature of reward systems, levels of formalization and red tape, bureaucratic structures, and goal ambiguity. Using questionnaire data from a variety of public and private organizations, we find that there is considerable variance in organizations' risk culture but the sector of an organization tells us little about its risk culture. Risk culture is, however, well accounted for by the various explanatory factors employed here. Particularly, a riskier culture is positively related to the willingness of top managers to trust employees and to the clarity of organizations' missions. Organizations with more red tape, weak links between promotion and performance, and high involvement with elected officials tend to have a less risky culture.
Public Administration Review has been the premier journal in the field of public administration research and theory for more than 75 years, and is the only journal in public administration that serves academics, practitioners, and students interested in the public sector and public sector management. Articles identify and analyze current trends, provide a factual basis for decision making, stimulate discussion, and make the leading literature in the field available in an easily accessible format.
Wiley is a global provider of content and content-enabled workflow solutions in areas of scientific, technical, medical, and scholarly research; professional development; and education. Our core businesses produce scientific, technical, medical, and scholarly journals, reference works, books, database services, and advertising; professional books, subscription products, certification and training services and online applications; and education content and services including integrated online teaching and learning resources for undergraduate and graduate students and lifelong learners. Founded in 1807, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. has been a valued source of information and understanding for more than 200 years, helping people around the world meet their needs and fulfill their aspirations. Wiley has published the works of more than 450 Nobel laureates in all categories: Literature, Economics, Physiology or Medicine, Physics, Chemistry, and Peace. Wiley has partnerships with many of the world’s leading societies and publishes over 1,500 peer-reviewed journals and 1,500+ new books annually in print and online, as well as databases, major reference works and laboratory protocols in STMS subjects. With a growing open access offering, Wiley is committed to the widest possible dissemination of and access to the content we publish and supports all sustainable models of access. Our online platform, Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) is one of the world’s most extensive multidisciplinary collections of online resources, covering life, health, social and physical sciences, and humanities.
This item is part of a JSTOR Collection.
For terms and use, please refer to our
Public Administration Review
© 1998 American Society for Public Administration