Predicting and cultivating public service motivation : a longitudinal study measuring the effect of participation in Americorp programs

2011·7 MB·English

by  Ward, Kevin D.

PREDICTING AND CULTIVATING PUBLIC SERVICE MOTIVATION: A
LONGITUDINAL STUDY MEASURING THE EFFECT OF PARTICIPATION IN
AMERICORPS PROGRAMS
by
Kevin Dykeman Ward
B.A., University of Illinois, 2002
M.P.A., University of Colorado Denver, 2006
A thesis submitted to the
University of Colorado Denver
in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
Public Affairs
2011
© 201 I by Kevin Dykeman Ward
All rights reserved.
This thesis for the Doctor of Philosophy
degree by
Kevin Dykeman Ward
has been approved
by
Peter deLeon
Nancy L. Leech
,. ' 9..A,
7.11'
Date
Ward, Kevin D. (Ph.D., Public Affairs)
Predicting and Cultivating Public Service Motivation: A Longitudinal Study
Measuring the Effect of Participation in AmeriCorps Programs
Thesis directed by Professor Peter deLeon
ABSTRACT
Public service motivation theory argues that people in the public sector hold
d({ferent values than their private sector counterparts. Hm,vever, little is understood
about how public scn'ice motivation may be affected o1•er time and as the result of
organizational experiences. Similar~v. the validity oft he public sen ·ice motivation
scale using secondmy data has large~v been unexamined. This research uses
longitudinal data to track the effect ofparticipation in the national service program
AmeriCorps on participants and compares these results to a similar comparison
group. It is posited that public sen·ice motivation may be cultivated through
participation in service-oriented acti1•ity in the nonprofit sector. Findings revealed
that antecedent conditions ofP SM. including prevalence ofs eeing family members
and mentors help others as well as participation in student government weak~v (but
sign(ficantly) predict whether someone joins AmeriC01ps programs. Additionally,
Perry's original public service motimtion construct appears to hold when using
secondmy data among people ulzo are interested in national sen·ice. Longitudinal
ana~vsis ofa n adapted public sen•ice motivation construct reveals that participation
in AmeriCorps programs positive~v affects participants' levels of commitment to
public interest and their knowledge of their communities. Participation also
positively affects participants· levels ofa ttraction to public policymaking; howerer a
comparison group demonstrates a similar jump in these measures. Finally,
members· levels ofo penness to new ideas appear to be negative(v related to sen•ice
in AmeriCorps. Additionally, it is found that nonparticipants experienced sign(ficant
declines in their levels of commitment to public interest, openness to new ideas, and
knowledge of their communities over an eight year period.
This abstract accurately represents the content of the candidate's thesis.
recommend its publication.
Signed _______________
Peter deLeon
DEDICATION
This dissertation is dedicated to my parents, Mike and Sue Ward, who have been
there every step of the way and have always encouraged me to strive for excellence
and reach for the stars - I feel very fortunate to have come from such a supporting
and encouraging family. Additionally, I dedicate this dissertation to my beautiful
and magnificent bride-to-be, Jennifer, as we look forward to our next exciting
chapters in our lives and starting a family of our own.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to express my deep gratitude to the many people who were
responsible in some form for me starting, and ultimately finishing this degree and
dissertation. First, this accomplishment would not have been possible without the
encouragement from Dean Paul Teske and Associate Dean Linda deLeon to pursue a
doctorate.
I would also like to thank my cohort for creating an encouraging academic
environment. In particular, I will always feel a close bond with Katrina Miller
Stevens who helped me to stay balanced, have fun, and always blazed the trail for
the rest of us.
Next, I would like to thank my committee for the role each played in my personal
and academic development. Prof. Perry for taking a chance on a relative stranger
and his willingness to share his unmatched wisdom relating to the public service
motivation theory; Prof. Guy for providing numerous opportunities to get in front of
a classroom and get my feet wet teaching at the graduate level; Prof. Leech for
helping me to understand the elegance in asking and answering simple questions;
Prof. Varda for serving as role model and an inspiration for what an academic career
can be- in addition to her willingness to open doors at RAND and include me on
her cutting edge research,; and finally, to my advisor Prof. deLeon. Prof. deLeon
has provided a steady hand and sage guidance through nearly every phase of my
graduate studies, and has been critical in my development as a scholar and job
candidate. Whether it was providing detailed comments on term papers, turning
around drafts of my dissertation quickly, writing incredible letters of
recommendation, providing advice that I do not always understand at first, but is
almost always validated, there is not a more important person to my development
than Prof. deLeon - I thank you.
In addition to my advisors in the academy, I would like to acknowledge the role
that Jon Roman at the Urban Institute and Lois Davis at the RAND Corporation
played in exposing me to large-scale, well-designed research. My experiences at
Urban and RAND were incredibly formative experiences in my development as a
researcher.
Next, this dissertation and my relative successes would not be possible without the
loving support of my parents, Mike and Sue Ward, who have always been there for
me every step of the way. Whether it was helping me to understand the incredibly
frustrating concept of subtraction in elementary school, or helping me to maintain
forward progress as a young adult, I will forever appreciate their genuine interest in
seeing me succeed. Additionally, my brother, Matt, has always kept me on my toes.
His track record of following in my footsteps, but outdoing all of my performances
has always forced me think critically about my choices.
Finally, and perhaps most importantly, I want to thank my incredibly beautiful,
ever-patient, and wonderfully self-less bride-to-be, Jennifer for being by my side
during two of the most important times of my life to date. During our trip around the
world, I knew I had found a keeper. But it was her steadiness, loyalty, and
willingness to sacrifice during a time when I was trying to find a job in a dismal
market, finishing a dissertation, and planning a wedding, that leaves no doubt in
mind that we will have a long and joyous marriage. I am confident that I am the
most fortunate man in the universe.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Tables ...................................................................................................................... xii
Figures ................................................................................................................... xvi
Chapter
I: Introduction ......................................................................................................... 1
1.1. National Service in the United States ........................................................... 1
1.2. AmeriCorps- A Brief Introduction .............................................................. 4
1.3. Management in Sectors- Public Sector Motivation ..................................... 6
1.4. Personnel and Hiring in the US Government... ........................................... 10
1.5. Practical and Theoretical Implications of Research .................................... 11
1.6. Research Questions ..................................................................................... 14
1. 7. Thesis Preview ............................................................................................ 14
2: Literature Review .............................................................................................. 16
2.1. Public vs. Private Management .................................................................... 16
2.1.1 Evolution of the Public vs. Private Distinction ......................................... 19
2.2. Defining Public Service Motivation ............................................................. 21
2.3. Public Service Motivation- Initial Development of a Theory .................... 22
2.4. Competing Theories to PSM ........................................................................ 29
2.5. Public Service Motivation Research ............................................................. 34
2.5.1. Refining the Construct ............................................................................. 34
2.5.2. Linking PSM to Performance .................................................................. 38
2.5.3. Antecedent Conditions ............................................................................. 41
2.5.4. Organizational Influences on PSM .......................................................... 46
2.5.5. Public Service Motivation over Time ...................................................... 49
2.5.6. Participation in AmeriCorps .................................................................... 54
2.6. Hypotheses .................................................................................................... 57
VIII
3: Methodology ..................................................................................................... 62
3 .1. Overview of the Methodology Chapter ........................................................ 62
3.1.1. Overview ofthe Research Design ............................................................ 62
3.2. Data ............................................................................................................... 63
3.2. 1 . Population ................................................................................................ 63
3.2.2. Sampling Procedures ................................................................................ 65
3.2.3. Instrumentation ........................................................................................ 68
3.2.4. Validity and Reliability ............................................................................ 71
3.3. Statistical Analysis ....................................................................................... 73
3.3 .1. Binary Logistic Regression ...................................................................... 73
3.3.2. Exploratory Factor Analysis (Principal-axis Factoring) .......................... 74
3.3.3. Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Structural Equation Modeling .......... 76
3.3.4. Assumptions ofCFA ................................................................................ 78
3.3.5. Ordinal and Likert Scale Data- Bayesian CFA and SEM ...................... 81
3 .4. Limitations and Strengths ............................................................................. 82
3.4.1. Limitations ............................................................................................... 82
3.4.2. Strengths ................................................................................................... 87
4: Analysis ............................................................................................................. 88
4.1. Overview of Results Section ........................................................................ 88
4.2. Description of the Sample ............................................................................ 89
4.2.1. Demographic Information ........................................................................ 89
4.2.2. Important Factors for Joining/Inquiring about AmeriCorps .................... 96
4.2.3. Program Experience and Satisfaction .................................................... 101
4.3. Predicting Participation in AmeriCorps using Antecedents Conditions of
PSM .................................................................................................................. 105
4.4. Using Secondary Data to Test PSM ........................................................... 109
4.5. Confirming Model Fit... .............................................................................. 113
4.5.1. First Order CF A-Two, Three and Four Factor Models ....................... 114
4.5.2. Second Order CFA -Two, Three, and Four Factor Models .................. 118
4.5.3. Four Factor CFA- Reduced Indicators ................................................. 121
4.6. Multiple Groups Factor Analysis- Comparing Latent Means ................... 132
4.6.1. Comparing Means-Treatment and Comparison at Baseline ................ 132
4.6.2. Comparing Means-Treatment and Comparison at Post-AmeriCorps
program ........................................................................................................... 133
4.6.3. Comparing Means-Treatment and Comparison at Wave III (2007) ... 135
4.7. Examining Changes in PSM over Time ..................................................... 137
IX