Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T14:10:40.512Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
Series:   Elements in Public and Nonprofit Administration

The Hidden Tier of Social Services

Frontline Workers' Provision of Informal Resources in the Public, Nonprofit, and Private Sectors

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2022

Einat Lavee
Einat Lavee
Affiliation:
University of Haifa, Israel

Summary

What do frontline social service providers do during client interactions when they lack adequate formal organizational resources to respond to clients' needs? To answer this question, this Element presents two large-scale qualitative studies of Israeli frontline providers of social services. Drawing on interviews of public-sector workers (Study 1, N=214), it introduces a widespread phenomenon, where the vast majority of frontline workers regularly provide a large range of informal personal resources (IFRs) to clients. Study 2 (N=84) then compares IFR provision between workers from the public, nonprofit and private sectors. The comparative analysis demonstrates how workers' rationale for providing personal resources to clients is shaped by particular role perceptions embedded in values, norms and behavioral expectations that vary by employment sector. The Element concludes by presenting ramifications of the phenomenon of IFR provision in terms of citizens' wellbeing, social inequality, gender relations and the future of work in public administration.
Get access

Keywords

public servicesinformal resourceshybridfrontlinediscretion
Type
Element
Information
Series: Elements in Public and Nonprofit Administration
Online ISBN: 9781009105828
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication: 18 August 2022

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Andersen, L. B. (2009). What determines the behaviour and performance of health professionals? Public service motivation, professional norms and/or economic incentives. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 75(1), 79–97. http://doi.org/10.1177/0020852308099507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baarspul, H. C., & Wilderom, C. P. M. (2011). Do employees behave differently in public- vs private-sector organizations? Public Management Review, 13(7), 967–1002. http://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2011.589614.Google Scholar
Baines, D., & Armstrong, P. (2019). Non-job work/unpaid caring: Gendered industrial relations in long-term care. Gender, Work & Organization, 26(7), 934–947. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baines, D., Cunningham, I., & Shields, J. (2017). Filling the gaps: Unpaid (and precarious) work in the nonprofit social services. Critical Social Policy, 37(4), 625–645. http://doi.org/10.1177/0261018317693128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Becker, H. S. (1996). The epistemology of qualitative research. In R. Jessor, A. Colby & R. Sweder (eds.), Ethnography and human development: Context and meaning in social inquiry, 27 (53–71). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Benjamin, O. (2016). Gendering Israel’s outsourcing: The erasure of employees’ caring skills. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Bergeron, D. M. (2007). The potential paradox of organizational citizenship behavior: Good citizens at what cost? Academy of Management Review, 32(4), 1078–1095. http://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2007.26585791.Google Scholar
Bøgh Andersen, L., & Serritzlew, S. (2012). Does public service motivation affect the behavior of professionals? International Journal of Public Administration, 35(1), 19–29. http://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2011.635277.Google Scholar
Bolino, M. C., & Grant, A. M. (2016). The bright side of being prosocial at work, and the dark side, too: A review and agenda for research on other-oriented motives, behavior, and impact in organizations. Academy of Management Annals, 10(1), 599–670. http://doi.org/10.5465/19416520.2016.1153260Google Scholar
Bolino, M. C., Klotz, A. C., Turnley, W. H., & Harvey, J. (2013). Exploring the dark side of organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34(4), 542–559. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1847.Google Scholar
Bolino, M. C., & Turnley, W. H. (2005). The personal costs of citizenship behavior: The relationship between individual initiative and role overload, job stress, and work-family conflict. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(4), 740–748. http://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.4.740.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boyte, H. C. (2005). Reframing democracy: Governance, civic agency, and politics. Public Administration Review, 65(5), 536–546. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2005.00481.x.Google Scholar
Bröckling, U. (2015). The entrepreneurial self: Fabricating a new type of subject. London: SAGE.Google Scholar
Brodkin, E. Z. (2006). Bureaucracy redux: Management reformism and the welfare state. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 17(1), 1–17. http://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muj019.Google Scholar
Brodkin, E. Z. (2011). Policy work: Street-level organizations under new managerialism. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21(suppl 2), i253–i277. http://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muq093.Google Scholar
Bryson, J., Crosby, B., & Bloomberg, L. (2014). Public value governance: Moving beyond traditional public administration and the New Public Management. Public Administration Review, 74(4), 445–456. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bryson, J., Crosby, B., & Bloomberg, L. (2015). Public value and public administration. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Burawoy, M. (1998). The Extended Case Method. Sociological Theory, 16(1), 4–33. https://doi.org/10.1111/0735-2751.00040.Google Scholar
Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory. London: SAGE.Google Scholar
Christensen, R. K., Moon, K.-K., & Whitford, A. B. (2021). Genetics and sector of employment. International Public Management Journal, 24(5), 585–595. http://doi.org/10.1080/10967494.2020.1802631.Google Scholar
Christensen, R. K., Paarlberg, L., & Perry, J. L. (2017). Public service motivation research: Lessons for practice. Public Administration Review, 77(4), 529–542. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12796.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, N. (2016). How culture affects street-level bureaucrats’ bending the rules in the context of informal payments for health care: The Israeli case. The American Review of Public Administration, 48(2), 175–187. http://doi.org/10.1177/0275074016665919.Google Scholar
Cohen, N. (2021). Policy entrepreneurship at the street level: Understanding the effect of the individual. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cohen, N., Benish, A., & Shamriz-Ilouz, A. (2016). When the clients can choose: Dilemmas of street-level workers in choice-based social services. Social Service Review, 90(4), 620–646. http://doi.org/10.1086/689621.Google Scholar
Denhardt, J. V., & Denhardt, R. B. (2015). The New Public Service: Serving, not steering. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2008). The landscape of qualitative research, vol. 1. Thousand Oaks, CA: : SAGE.Google Scholar
Destler, K. N. (2016). A matter of trust: Street level bureaucrats, organizational climate and performance management reform. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 27(3), 517–534. http://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muw055.Google Scholar
Dörrenbächer, N. (2017). Europe at the frontline: Analysing street-level motivations for the use of European Union migration law. Journal of European Public Policy, 24(9), 1328–1347. http://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2017.1314535.Google Scholar
Dubois, V. (2016). The bureaucrat and the poor: Encounters in French welfare offices. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ebrahim, A., Battilana, J., & Mair, J. (2014). The governance of social enterprises: Mission drift and accountability challenges in hybrid organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 34, 81–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eldor, L. (2017). Public service sector: The compassionate workplace – The effect of compassion and stress on employee engagement, burnout, and performance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 28(1), 86–103. http://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mux028.Google Scholar
England, P. (2005). Gender inequality in labor markets: The role of motherhood and segregation. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society, 12(2), 264–288. http://doi.org/10.1093/sp/jxi014.Google Scholar
Evans, T. (2012). Organisational rules and discretion in adult social work. The British Journal of Social Work, 43(4), 739–758. http://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcs008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, T. (2016). Professional discretion in welfare services: Beyond street-level bureaucracy. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, T., & Hupe, P. (2020). Discretion and the quest for controlled freedom. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Fossestøl, K., Breit, E., Andreassen, T. A., & Klemsdal, L. (2015). Managing institutional complexity in public sector reform: Hybridization in front-line service organizations. Public Administration, 93(2), 290–306. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12144.Google Scholar
Freidson, E. (2001). Professionalism, the third logic: On the practice of knowledge. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Giauque, D., Ritz, A., Varone, F., & Anderfuhren-Biget, S. (2012). Resigned but satisfied: The negative impact of public service motivation and red tape on work satisfaction. Public Administration, 90(1), 175–193. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2011.01953.x.Google Scholar
Glinsner, B., Sauer, B., Gaitsch, M., Penz, O., & Hofbauer, J. (2019). Doing gender in public services: Affective labour of employment agents. Gender, Work & Organization, 26(7), 983–999. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gofen, A. (2013). Mind the gap: Dimensions and influence of street-level divergence. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 24(2), 473–493. http://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mut037.Google Scholar
Guy, M. E., & Newman, M. A. (2004). Women’s jobs, men’s jobs: Sex segregation and emotional labor. Public Administration Review, 64(3), 289–298. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2004.00373.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hacker, J. S. (2019). The great risk shift: The new economic insecurity and the decline of the American dream: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Harrits, G. S. (2019). Stereotypes in context: How and when do street-level bureaucrats use class stereotypes? Public Administration Review, 79(1), 93–103. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12952.Google Scholar
Hartmann, J., & Khademian, A. M. (2010). Culture change refined and revitalized: The road show and guides for pragmatic action. Public Administration Review, 70(6), 845–856. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2010.02216.x.Google Scholar
Harvey, D. (2007). A brief history of neoliberalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
He, P., Zhou, Q., Zhao, H., Jiang, C., & Wu, Y. J. (2020). Compulsory citizenship behavior and employee creativity: Creative self-efficacy as a mediator and negative affect as a moderator. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1640–1640. http://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01640.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hsieh, C.-W. (2014). Burnout among public service workers: The role of emotional labor requirements and job resources. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 34(4), 379–402. http://doi.org/10.1177/0734371x12460554.Google Scholar
Hupe, P., & Buffat, A. (2014). A public service gap: Capturing contexts in a comparative approach of street-level bureaucracy. Public Management Review, 16(4), 548–569. http://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2013.854401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hupe, P., & Hill, M. (2007). Street-level bureacracy and public accountability. Public Administration, 85(2), 279–299. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2007.00650.x.Google Scholar
Hupe, P., & Krogt, T. v. d. (2013). Professionals dealing with pressures. In Mirko, N. & Bram, S. (eds.), Professionals under pressure: The reconfiguration of professional work in changing public services (pp. 55–72). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
Jilke, S., & Tummers, L. (2018). Which clients are deserving of help? A theoretical model and experimental test. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 28(2), 226–238. http://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muy002.Google Scholar
Koopman, J., Lanaj, K., & Scott, B. A. (2015). Integrating the bright and dark sides of OCB: A daily investigation of the benefits and costs of helping others. Academy of Management Journal, 59(2), 414–435. http://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2014.0262.Google Scholar
Kosar, K. R., & Schachter, H. L. (2011). Street level-bureaucracy: The dilemmas endure. [Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public services, Michael Lipsky]. Public Administration Review, 71(2), 299–302. www.jstor.org/stable/41061191.Google Scholar
Krøtel, S. M. L., & Villadsen, A. R. (2016). Employee turnover in hybrid organizations: The role of public sector socialization and organizational privateness. Public Administration, 94(1), 167–184. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12211.Google Scholar
Lam, C. F., & Mayer, D. M. (2014). When do employees speak up for their customers? A model of voice in a customer service context. Personnel Psychology, 67(3), 637–666. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12050.Google Scholar
Lavee, E. (2021). Who is in charge? The provision of informal personal resources at the street level. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 31(1), 4–20.Google Scholar
Lavee, E., & Cohen, N. (2019). How street-level bureaucrats become policy entrepreneurs: The case of urban renewal. Governance, 32(3), 475–492. https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.12387.Google Scholar
Lavee, E., Cohen, N., & Nouman, H. (2018). Reinforcing public responsibility? Influences and practices in street-level bureaucrats’ engagement in policy design. Public Administration, 96(2), 333–348. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12402.Google Scholar
Lavee, E., & Itzchakov, G. (2021). Good listening: A key element in establishing quality in qualitative research. Qualitative research, 0(0), 14687941211039402. http://doi.org/10.1177/14687941211039402Google Scholar
Lavee, E., & Offer, S. (2012). “If you sit and cry no one will help you”: Understanding perceptions of worthiness and social support relations among low-income women under a neoliberal discourse. The Sociological Quarterly, 53(3), 374–393. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.2012.01240.x.Google Scholar
Lavee, E., & Pindek, S. (2020). The costs of customer service citizenship behaviors: A qualitative study. Frontiers in Psychology, 11(460). http://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00460.Google Scholar
Lavee, E., & Strier, R. (2018). Social workers’ emotional labour with families in poverty: Neoliberal fatigue? Child & Family Social Work, 23(3), 504–512. https://doi.org/10.1111/cfs.12443.Google Scholar
Lavee, E., & Strier, R. (2019). Transferring emotional capital as coerced discretion: Street-level bureaucrats reconciling structural deficiencies. Public Administration, 97(4), 910–925. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leete, L. (2000). Wage equity and employee motivation in nonprofit and for-profit organizations. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 43(4), 423–446. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-2681(00)00129-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lincoln, Y. S., & Denzin, N. K. (2003). Turning points in qualitative research: Tying knots in a handkerchief, vol. 2. Oxford: Rowman Altamira.Google Scholar
Lipsky, M. (2010 [1980]). Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public service. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Lyons, B. J., & Scott, B. A. (2012). Integrating social exchange and affective explanations for the receipt of help and harm: A social network approach. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 117(1), 66–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2011.10.002.Google Scholar
Ma, E., & Qu, H. (2011). Social exchanges as motivators of hotel employees’ organizational citizenship behavior: The proposition and application of a new three-dimensional framework. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 30(3), 680–688. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2010.12.003.Google Scholar
Maman, D., & Rosenhek, Z. (2011). The Israeli central bank: Political economy, global logics and local actors. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Maynard-Moody, S., & Musheno, M. (2000). State agent or citizen agent: Two narratives of discretion. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10(2), 329–358. http://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a024272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maynard-Moody, S., & Musheno, M. (2003). Cops, teachers, counselors: Stories from the front lines of public service. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Maynard‐Moody, S., & Portillo, S. (2010). Street‐level bureaucracy theory. In R. F. Durant (ed.), The Oxford handbook of American bureaucracy (pp. 252–277). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Moynihan, D. P. (2008). The dynamics of performance management: Constructing information and reform. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Munyon, T. P., Hochwarter, W. A., Perrewé, P. L., & Ferris, G. R. (2009). Optimism and the nonlinear citizenship behavior: Job satisfaction relationship in three studies. Journal of Management, 36(6), 1505–1528. http://doi.org/10.1177/0149206309350085.Google Scholar
Ng, E. S. W., Gossett, C. W., & Winter, R. (2016). Millennials and public service renewal: Introduction on millennials and public service motivation (PSM). Public Administration Quarterly, 40(3), 412–428. www.jstor.org/stable/24772877.Google Scholar
Nielsen, T. M., Hrivnak, G. A., & Shaw, M. (2009). Organizational citizenship behavior and performance: A meta-analysis of group-level research. Small Group Research, 40(5), 555–577. http://doi.org/10.1177/1046496409339630.Google Scholar
Nieuwenhuis, R., & Maldonado, L. (2018). The triple bind of single-parent families: Resources, employment and policies to improve well-being. Bristol: Policy Press.Google Scholar
Nordhall, O., Knez, I., Saboonchi, F., & Willander, J. (2020). Teachers’ personal and collective work-identity predicts exhaustion and work motivation: Mediating roles of psychological job demands and resources. Frontiers in Psychology, 11(1538). http://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01538.Google Scholar
Organ, D. W. (1988). Organizational citizenship behavior: The good soldier syndrome. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books/DC Heath and Com.Google Scholar
Osborne, S. P. (2010). The new public governance? Emerging perspectives on the theory and practice. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Pache, A.-C., & Santos, F. (2012). Inside the hybrid organization: Selective coupling as a response to competing institutional logics. Academy of Management Journal, 56(4), 972–1001. http://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.0405.Google Scholar
Perry, J. L., & Wise, L. R. (1990). The motivational bases of public service. Public Administration Review, 50, 367–373.Google Scholar
Pollitt, C. (2010). Cuts and reforms – Public services as we move into a new era. Society and Economy, 32(1), 17–31. http://doi.org/10.1556/socec.32.2010.1.3.Google Scholar
Pollitt, C., & Bouckaert, G. (2017). Public management reform: A comparative analysis-into the age of austerity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Potipiroon, W., Srisuthisa-ard, A., & Faerman, S. (2019). Public service motivation and customer service behaviour: Testing the mediating role of emotional labour and the moderating role of gender. Public Management Review, 21(5), 650–668. http://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2018.1500629.Google Scholar
Riccucci, N. M. (2017). Antecedents of public service motivation: The role of gender. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance, 1(2), 115–126. http://doi.org/10.1093/ppmgov/gvx010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roulston, K. (2010). Considering quality in qualitative interviewing. Qualitative Research, 10(2), 199–228. http://doi.org/10.1177/1468794109356739.Google Scholar
Schram, S. F., Soss, J., Fording, R. C., & Houser, L. (2009). Deciding to Discipline: Race, Choice, and Punishment at the Frontlines of Welfare Reform. American sociological review, 74(3), 398–422. http://doi.org/10.1177/000312240907400304.Google Scholar
Skelcher, C., & Ferlie, E. (2005). Public-private partnerships and hybridity. In E. Ferlie, L. E. Lynn Jr. & C. Pollitt (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Public Management (pp. 347–370). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Skelcher, C., & Smith, S. (2015). Theorizing Hybridity: Institutional logics, complex organizations, and actor identities: The case of nonprofits. Public Administration, 93(2), 433–448. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12105.Google Scholar
Small, M. L. (2006). Neighborhood institutions as resource brokers: Childcare centers, interorganizational ties, and resource access among the poor. Social Problems, 53(2), 274–292. http://doi.org/10.1525/sp.2006.53.2.274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Small, M. L. (2009a). “How many cases do I need?”: On science and the logic of case selection in field-based research. Ethnography, 10(1), 5–38. http://doi.org/10.1177/1466138108099586.Google Scholar
Small, M. L. (2009b). Unanticipated gains: Origins of network inequality in everyday life. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Small, M. L., & Gose, L. (2020). How do low-income people form survival networks? Routine organizations as brokers. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 689(1), 89–109. http://doi.org/10.1177/0002716220915431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, S. R. (2010). Hybridization and nonprofit organizations: The governance challenge. Policy and Society, 29(3), 219–229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polsoc.2010.06.003.Google Scholar
Soss, J., Fording, R., & Schram, S. F. (2011). The organization of discipline: From Performance management to perversity and punishment. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21(suppl 2), i203–i232. http://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muq095.Google Scholar
Statistics, I. C. B. o. (2019). Statistical abstract of Israel.Google Scholar
Statistics, U. S. B. o. L. (2021). Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey. www.bls.gov/cps/tables.htm.Google Scholar
Steijn, B., & van der Voet, J. (2019). Relational job characteristics and job satisfaction of public sector employees: When prosocial motivation and red tape collide. Public Administration, 97(1), 64–80. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomann, E. (2015). Is output performance all about the resources? A fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis of street-level bureaucrats In Switzerland. Public Administration, 93(1), 177–194. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12130.Google Scholar
Thomann, E., Hupe, P., & Sager, F. (2018). Serving many masters: Public accountability in private policy implementation. Governance, 31(2), 299–319. https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.12297.Google Scholar
Thomann, E., van Engen, N., & Tummers, L. (2018). The necessity of discretion: A behavioral evaluation of bottom-up implementation theory. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 28(4), 583–601. http://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muy024.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tracy, S. J., & Hinrichs, M. M. (2017). Big tent criteria for qualitative quality. In J. Matthes, C. Davis & R. Potter (eds.), The international encyclopedia of communication research methods (pp. 1–10). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Tummers, L., & Bekkers, V. (2014). Policy implementation, street-level bureaucracy, and the importance of discretion. Public Management Review, 16(4), 527–547. http://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2013.841978.Google Scholar
Tummers, L., Bekkers, V., Vink, E., & Musheno, M. (2015). coping during public service delivery: A conceptualization and systematic review of the literature. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25(4), 1099–1126. http://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muu056.Google Scholar
Tummers, L., Steijn, B., & Bekkers, V. (2012). Explaining the willingness of public professionals to implement public policies: Content, context, and personality characteristics. Public Administration, 90(3), 716–736. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2011.02016.x.Google Scholar
van Oorschot, W. (2010). Public perceptions of the economic, moral, social and migration consequences of the welfare state: An empirical analysis of welfare state legitimacy. Journal of European Social Policy, 20(1), 19–31. http://doi.org/10.1177/0958928709352538.Google Scholar
Vigoda‐Gadot, E. (2006). Compulsory citizenship behavior: Theorizing some dark sides of the good soldier syndrome in organizations. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 36(1), 77–93.Google Scholar
Vigoda-Gadot, E. (2007). Redrawing the boundaries of OCB? An empirical examination of compulsory extra-role behavior in the workplace. Journal of business and psychology, 21(3), 377–405. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-006-9034-5.Google Scholar
Watkins-Hayes, C. (2011). Race, respect, and red tape: Inside the black box of racially representative bureaucracies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21(suppl_2), i233–i251. http://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muq096.Google Scholar
Whiting, S. W., Podsakoff, P. M., & Pierce, J. R. (2008). Effects of task performance, helping, voice, and organizational loyalty on performance appraisal ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(1), 125–139. http://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.1.125.Google Scholar
Yang, S.-B., & Guy, M. E. (2014). Gender effects on emotional labor in Seoul Metropolitan Area. Public Personnel Management, 44(1), 3–24. http://doi.org/10.1177/0091026014550491.Google Scholar
Yildiz, B., & Elibol, E. (2021). Turnover intention linking compulsory citizenship behaviours to social loafing in nurses: A mediation analysis. Journal of Nursing Management, 29(4), 653–663. https://doi.org/10.1111/jonm.13200.Google Scholar
Zacka, B. (2018). When the state meets the street. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Save element to Kindle

To save this element to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

The Hidden Tier of Social Services
  • Einat Lavee, University of Haifa, Israel
  • Online ISBN: 9781009105828
Available formats
×

Save element to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

The Hidden Tier of Social Services
  • Einat Lavee, University of Haifa, Israel
  • Online ISBN: 9781009105828
Available formats
×

Save element to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

The Hidden Tier of Social Services
  • Einat Lavee, University of Haifa, Israel
  • Online ISBN: 9781009105828
Available formats
×