Does a Federal Glass Ceiling Have Differential Effects on Female and Male Technology Entrepreneurs?

Glass ceilings are invisible organizational barriers encountered by underrepresented groups in large hierarchies. This chapter empirically investigates the existence and characteristics of an internal, government-wide glass ceiling for female employees using aggregate pay grade and demographic data on nearly 1.5 million U.S. Federal employees between 2001-2011. The external consequences for over 15,000 technology ventures seeking R&D funding from 12 federal agencies is explored. In this context, the researchers analyze over 50,000 grants and find that a unit increase in a novel, government-wide, glass ceiling measure is a meaningful and negative predictor of subsequent Phase II funding outcomes for Phase I grantees. More importantly, the negative external effects of the identified glass ceilings are significantly larger for women technology entrepreneurs when compared to their male counterparts.

The COVID States Project #64: Continued high public support for mandating vaccines

COVID-19 continues to surge in the United States and elsewhere, propelled by the highly contagious Delta variant. As of this writing (on September 29, 2021), about three quarters (76%) of the eligible U.S. population (age 12 and up) have received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. This is likely not enough to achieve herd immunity in the United States. Though the specific number remains uncertain, a recent estimate by the Infectious Diseases Society of America suggests that over 80% of the entire population must be fully vaccinated to reach herd immunity.More worrisome, around 1 in 5 Americans, depending on the poll, continue to say they are either uncertain or will not get the vaccine. In our most recent survey wave (fielded from August 26 to September 27, 2021), 10% of respondents who indicated that they are not yet vaccinated claimed they are extremely unlikely to get it. Another 12% are “somewhat” unlikely to seek the vaccine.In recent weeks, the Biden administration has shifted tactics in its efforts to get as many Americans as possible vaccinated. The Administration had from the outset emphasized the benefits of getting vaccinated as its primary strategy for persuading reluctant Americans to do so. Yet, starting in September the prevailing strategy seemingly shifted from emphasizing carrots to sticks. On September 9th, President Biden issued an executive order requiring all federal employees and government contractors to be vaccinated, and also announced that the U.S. Department of Labor would require that all companies with more than 100 employees require vaccination or weekly testing, as well as provide paid time off for employees to get vaccinated. The Biden Administration has also encouraged states and smaller companies to impose similar vaccine mandates.The question arises as to whether the persistence of the Delta variant has increased public support for making COVID-19 vaccines mandatory. In our April/May survey wave, six in ten respondents approved of the government mandating vaccines for everyone (see Report #52). This figure increased modestly, to 64% in our June/July survey (see Report #58).In this report, we update our assessment of public support for vaccine mandates, both nationally and across the 50 states, based on our September survey wave.

Does goal setting matter? The impact of employee-level and organizational-level goal properties on public employees' perception of performance appraisal fairness

PurposeThis study examines the relationship between goal properties, both at the employee and organizational-level, and the perceived fairness of the performance appraisal system by federal employees.Design/methodology/approachWe describe the theoretical framework regarding goals and employee perceptions of performance appraisal fairness. We then develop and test four hypotheses, exploring the relationships among variables using five years of the FEVS data. To strengthen the research design, we created an agency-level dataset, by calculating agency-level averages for all the covariates. Instead of examining 500,000 federal employees each year, we are examining 80 federal agencies. Creating a panel dataset at the agency level allows us to make stronger statements about causality than using cross-sectional data.FindingsThis study finds a significant positive relationship between goal setting factors and employees' perceived fairness of performance appraisals: perceived employee-level goal difficulty and perceived organizational-level goal specificity at the agency level. The study results show that certain control variables, such as intrinsic motivation, play important roles in predicting public employees' perceived fairness of performance appraisals. Federal employees who have a higher level of intrinsic motivation show a more positive perception toward performance appraisal fairness. The appropriate use of extrinsic rewards and intrinsic motivation, combined with effective goal setting strategies in public organizations, may enhance public employees' perceived fairness of performance appraisal systems.Research limitations/implicationsThis study used the FEVS, necessitating the reduction of the sample size to agency level averages to create a panel dataset. Also, this study was limited to federal agencies in the United States, so research results may lack generalizability.Originality/valueThis paper fulfills an identified need to avoid cross-sectional research design and leverage longitudinal panel data.

Why Does PSM Lead to Higher Work Stress? Exploring the Role that Organizational Identity Theory has on the Relationship between Public Service Motivation and External-Related Stress among Federal Government Employees

This study explored the effects that organizational identity and perceptions of prestige have on the relationship between public service motivation (PSM) and public employees’ concerns regarding external-related work stressors. Using a sample of federal employees, the findings reveal that the relationship PSM has to perceptions of external-related stress were fully mediated by employee’s organizational identity (OI) and perceptions of organizational prestige (POP). Public employees with high levels of PSM were significantly more likely to report having a stronger bond with their organization and more favorable perceptions of outsider views of their organization. The implications of these findings are discussed.

EXPRESS: Federal Employees or Rogue Rangers: Sharing and Resisting Organizational Authority through Twitter Communication Practices

On January 24, 2017, the Trump administration tried to censor various science-related federal agencies, most notably, the National Park Service. This case study presents the emergence of “alternative” National Park Service Twitter accounts that subverted the ban and explores how “rogue rangers” share in and resist organizational authority through communicative practices we interpret as dis/attributing communicative action to various figures to do so. Through qualitative analysis of textual and non-textual data pertaining to the accounts, we demonstrate that organizational members create ambiguity through communicative dis/attribution to do and say more things than authorized, while maintaining a link to their organization, for it is as members that their actions and words are authoritative. The study concludes by theorizing three contributions to the literature on authority and resistance, in particular in the context of social media: 1) it shows that authority and resistance are at play even outside of conventional organizations, which conversely means that social media activity can display a level of organizationality; 2) it demonstrates that the communicative performance of authority and resistance rests on membership ambiguity; and 3) it extends current conversations on the communicative performance of authority by showing that the same practices can also perform resistance.

The Importance of Merit Principles for Civil Service Systems: Evidence from the U.S. Federal Sector

Merit principles have served as central tenets of the U.S. civil service system since the late 19th Century, but in recent decades reforms have been proposed and implemented that weaken central aspects of merit. This makes it important to seek evidence about how government employees perceive the status of merit principles and to examine relationships that exist between adherence to merit principles and work in federal agencies. Analysis indicates that federal employees who perceive adherence to merit principles also perceive a better quality of work life, compared to employees who see their agencies as less supportive of merit principles. Employees who perceive greater adherence to merit principles in their organizations report greater general satisfaction with their agencies as workplaces, higher levels satisfaction with leadership and recognition received, lower turnover intentions, and better quality of work unit output.

Digging Up a Painful Past

This chapter talks about the Mattachine Society of Washington, DC, an organization that takes its name from the pioneering gay rights organization of the pre-Stonewall era. It looks at Charles Francis, the president of the Mattachine Society and a leading figure among American gay rights activists, who was a former Republican public relations consultant from Texas with close personal ties to the Bush family. It also discusses Francis’s activism aimed at securing an acknowledgment and apology from the US Congress for discriminatory actions taken by the federal government against LGBT Americans. This chapter analyses the Mattachine Society’s briefing paper “America’s Promise of Reconciliation and Redemption: The Need for an Official Acknowledgment and Apology for the Historic Government Assault on LGBT Federal Employees and Military Personnel,” and it emphasizes the mission of the new Mattachine Society on adjusting the legal struggle to secure an apology from the US government.

Does Person Organization Fit and Person-Job Fit Mediate the Relationship between Public Service Motivation and Work Stress among U.S. Federal Employees?

A plethora of research has extolled the benefits of public service motivation (PSM) in public organizations. However, much less empirical attention has focused on its relationship to work stress. Even though it has been theorized that high levels of PSM causes individuals to be more resilient in stressful public service work environments, empirical research has failed to provide support. Only one study has been conducted which has revealed that high levels of PSM is directly associated with high levels of job stress among public employees, but that its beneficial effects are partially mediated by person-organization (PO) fit. That is, employees with high levels of PSM and high levels of fit to their organizations did not appear to suffer from high stress. This study sought to add to this limited body of research and explore the extent to which person-job (PJ) improves the field’s understanding of the relationships among PSM, PO fit, and work stress. Based on a sample of federal employees in the United States, this study challenged and confirmed the findings of existing research. For instance, PSM had no direct relationship to work stress. However, PSM maintained an indirect relationship to stress through PO fit. The respondents with high levels of PSM reported that they had high levels of fit to their organizations which was associated with significantly lower levels of work stress. Similarly, PSM was not directly related to PJ fit, but was indirectly related through its association with PO fit. PSM was associated with high levels of fit between employees and public organizations, which was subsequently associated with high levels of fit with public service jobs and lower work stress. Above all, this research clarifies the process of how PSM influences work stress among public employees, through PO fit and PJ fit.

The Administrative Presidency and Federal Service

Through the 20th and early 21st century, the United States has seen the growth of the administrative presidency. As political polarization has made it much more difficult for a presidential administration to push public policy initiatives through Congress, presidential administrations have become much more dependent on executive orders, policy statements, federal rulemaking, and nonenforcement policies to implement their agenda. Presidential administrations have also attempted to exert much greater control over the actions of federal employees with policymaking and policy implementation responsibilities. The article argues that the modern administrative presidency has become a serious threat to the nation’s democratic values and institutions. The article also argues that in the wrong hands, the administrative state may do great harm. Finally, the article argues that the discipline of public administration must end its love affair with the administrative presidency. The danger of misuse of the administrative state has just become too serious to permit presidential administrations to coerce career civil servants to put the ideological interests of a President over the public interest. To help control this serious problem, the article argues that the discipline of public administration should help to empower federal employees to serve as guardians of constitutional values by providing them the tools necessary to uncover and make known instances of abuse of power by presidential administrations intent upon ignoring the constitutional foundations of the administrative state.