The Impact of Accountability and Accountability Management on Performance at the Street Level

219 Pages·2013·2.88 MB·English

by  Kwangseon Hwang

The Impact of Accountability and Accountability Management on
Performance at the Street Level

Kwangseon Hwang

Dissertation submitted to the faculty of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State
University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
In
Public Administration and Public Affairs

Laura S. Jensen, Chair
Karen M. Hult
Patrick S. Roberts
Matthew M. Dull

July 23 2013
Blacksburg, VA

Keywords: Accountability, Performance, Accountability Management, The AMP model,
Public Organization, Public Management, Street-level Bureaucracy,
Child Welfare Policy, Social Services, Caseworkers

Copyright © 2013, Kwangseon Hwang
The Impact of Accountability and Accountability Management on
Performance at the Street Level

Kwangseon Hwang

ABSTRACT

Performance management is prevalent in public organizations and public services, but the
push for performance may harm genuine accountability. One critical reason for this is that little
knowledge has developed about the scope and effect of actual accountability requirements in the
public management field. This dissertation furthers our understanding of accountability and
performance by distinguishing them as different dimensions of public management. Building on
this distinction, the effect of accountability (A) on performance (P) and accountability
management’s (M) mediating role in the relationship between accountability and performance
were investigated empirically in child welfare services in Virginia. The study had two stages:
interviews and a survey. The qualitative content analysis of the interviews provides several
noteworthy findings. Accountability can be understood more with the terms: explanation,
expectation, people/society, action/decision, and values. Conversely, performance can be
considered more in line with the terms: productivity/outcome, timely work, team playing,
learning, and strategy. The incompatible characteristics found between accountability and
performance highlight problems behind performance-driven accountability. The survey portion
of the study, built upon the interview data, also presents notable findings. (1) Accountability
affects performance both directly and indirectly, and (2) accountability management matters in
the relationship between accountability and performance. While the empirical literature on the A
→ P link focuses on the effects of competing accountability requirements, my study examines
dimensions of the accountability requirements’ impact. Formal (e.g., legal) as well as informal
(e.g., ethical) accountability requirements are critical for ensuring higher performance.
Compliance strategies implicitly connect informal accountability requirements with work
performance. The findings support the study’s argument that accountability should be stressed
for better performance and highlight the need for the careful design of accountability
mechanisms in social services. Ultimately, this study may serve as a foundation for future efforts
to establish more appropriate accountability and performance arrangements.
DEDICATION

I dedicate this work to my family for their faithful love and support. I want to extend a special
feeling of gratitude to my loving parents:
Gi-yeon Hwang
Young-kum Choi
I want to thank God, the one who gives me a purpose in life and makes all that I do possible. All
the glory, honor, and praise for all I have done and ever will be must go to Him.

iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to thank to my PhD advisor, Professor Laura Jensen, for her academic guidance and
scientific advice. I also have to thank the members of my PhD committee, Professors Karen Hult,
Patrick Roberts, and Matthew Dull for their insightful discussions and suggestions in general.

I will forever be thankful to my former master program advisor, Professor Hyungjun Park. He
has been helpful in providing advice many times during my graduate school career. I’d also like
to give a heartfelt, special thanks to Dr. Sangok Choi. He was and remains my mentor and friend.

Members of The Stand Church also deserve my sincerest thanks, their friendship and assistance
has meant more to me than I could ever express. My friends in US were sources of laughter, joy,
and support. Special thanks go to Lance Shield. I am very happy that, in many cases, my
friendships with him have extended well beyond our shared time in Blacksburg.

My gratitude is also extended to my fellow doctoral students in Center for Public Administration
and Policy: Nadhrah, Aaron, Noel, Meredith, James, Raji, Minhthieng, Donna, Michal, Fatima,
and Emily. I gained a lot from them through their personal and scholarly interactions. I
acknowledge Donna and Aaron specifically for their help in editing the final draft.

Finally, I am deeply thankful to my family for their love, support, and sacrifices. Without them,
this dissertation would never have been written.

iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................... ii
DEDICATION ............................................................................................................................... iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................... iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................................ v
LIST OF TABLES ....................................................................................................................... viii
LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................................... ix

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 1
1.1. Problem Statement ...................................................................................................................... 1
1.2. Purpose of the Study ................................................................................................................... 4
1.3. Policy and Organizational Setting: Child Welfare Services.................................................... 7
1.3.1. Policy Setting ....................................................................................................................... 9
1.3.2. Child Welfare in Virginia ................................................................................................. 11
1.3.3. Organizational Setting ...................................................................................................... 14
1.4. Research Questions ................................................................................................................... 17
1.5. Significance of the Study and Overview.................................................................................. 19

CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................. 23
2.1. Conceptualization ..................................................................................................................... 23
2.1.1. The Concepts ..................................................................................................................... 23
2.1.2. Accountability and Performance at the Street-level ...................................................... 28
2.1.3. Formal and Informal Accountability .............................................................................. 31
2.2. Accountability and Performance ............................................................................................. 33
2.2.1. Accountability → Performance....................................................................................... 34
2.2.2. Reconsideration of Accountability for Performance ..................................................... 37
2.3. Accountability Management .................................................................................................... 39
2.3.1. Forming the Concept of Accountability Management................................................... 39
2.3.2. Strategies of Accountability Management ...................................................................... 42

v
CHAPTER 3. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODLOGY .......................................... 45
3.1. Justification for Case Selection ................................................................................................ 47
3.1.1. Case Selection: Child Welfare Services ........................................................................... 47
3.1.2. Linking the Model to Context .......................................................................................... 50
3.1.3. Study Target (Population of Interest) ............................................................................. 51
3.2. Phase One: Interview Design ................................................................................................... 54
3.2.1. Interview Procedures ........................................................................................................ 54
3.2.2. Qualitative Analysis Methods .......................................................................................... 56
3.3. Phase Two: Survey Design ....................................................................................................... 63
3.3.1. Analytical Framework ...................................................................................................... 63
3.3.2. Instrument Development and Measurement .................................................................. 65
3.3.3. Sample ................................................................................................................................ 77
3.3.4. Survey Data Collection ..................................................................................................... 79
3.3.5. Quantitative Analysis Methods ........................................................................................ 82
3.4. Limitations and Summary of Methodology ............................................................................ 84

CHAPTER 4. MAKING SENSE OF ACCOUNTABILITY AND PERFORMANCE ... 87
4.1. Introduction of Interview Data ................................................................................................ 88
4.2. Accountability and Performance in Child Welfare Services ................................................ 90
4.2.1. Dimensions of A and P ...................................................................................................... 90
4.2.2. Further Discussion ............................................................................................................ 97
4.3. Accountability Management in Child Welfare Services ...................................................... 103
4.3.1. Conflicting Accountability Requirements..................................................................... 104
4.3.2. Accountability Management .......................................................................................... 107
4.4. Summary of Making Sense of A and P ................................................................................. 111

vi
CHAPTER 5. IMPACT OF ACCOUNTABILTIY ON PERFORMANCE ................... 114
5.1. Introduction of Survey Data .................................................................................................. 116
5.2. Data Examination ................................................................................................................... 124
5.3. Factor Analysis ........................................................................................................................ 130
5.3.1. EFA: Extraction of Types ............................................................................................... 130
5.3.2. CFA: Measurement Model ............................................................................................. 139
5.4. SEM Analysis and Findings ................................................................................................... 146
5.4.1. Regression: Overall Relationship .................................................................................. 147
5.4.2. AMP: Structural Model .................................................................................................. 148
5.5. Discussion................................................................................................................................. 160

CHAPTER 6. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................ 167
6.1. Summary of findings ............................................................................................................... 167
6.2. Implications ............................................................................................................................. 169
6.3. Future Research ...................................................................................................................... 172
6.4. Concluding Remarks .............................................................................................................. 174

REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................... 175

Appendix A: Flow of Child Welfare Cases ................................................................................ 186
Appendix B: VT IRB Approval .................................................................................................. 187
Appendix C: VDSS IRB Approval ............................................................................................. 189
Appendix D: Interview Questionnaires ...................................................................................... 191
Appendix E: Survey Questionnaires ........................................................................................... 194
Appendix F: Content Analysis of Accountability ....................................................................... 198
Appendix G: Content Analysis of Performance ......................................................................... 200
Appendix H: Content Analysis of Accountability Management ................................................ 202
Appendix I: Descriptive Analysis after Data Transformation .................................................... 204
Appendix J: Assessment of normality (Measurement Model) ................................................... 205
Appendix K: Correlation and Anti-image Matrix ....................................................................... 206
Appendix L: Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) ........................................................................... 210

vii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Koppell’s Concept of Accountability ......................................................................... 25
Table 2: Operational Definition of Accountability (Reference for Selection) ....................... 59
Table 3: Examples of Coding Process ....................................................................................... 62
Table 4: Hypotheses .................................................................................................................... 64
Table 5: Characteristics of Interviewees .................................................................................. 88
Table 6: Categories of “Accountability Requirements” .......................................................... 92
Table 7: The Importance of Accountability Requirements for Child Welfare Workers ..... 93
Table 8: Categories of “Performance” ...................................................................................... 95
Table 9: Categories of “Accountability Management” ......................................................... 109
Table 10: Survey Items to Measure Work Performance ...................................................... 117
Table 11: Survey Items to Measure Accountability Requirements ..................................... 117
Table 12: Survey Items to Measure Accountability Management ....................................... 118
Table 13: Characteristics of Survey Participants .................................................................. 120
Table 14: Characteristics of Survey Participants by Service Region .................................. 123
Table 15: Descriptive Statistics ................................................................................................ 125
Table 16: Univariate Normality and Remedies ...................................................................... 127
Table 17: First EFA (revealing latent) .................................................................................... 134
Table 18: Second EFA (data reduction) ................................................................................. 135
Table 19: Respecified Factor Matrix ...................................................................................... 137
Table 20: Properties of the Measurement Model .................................................................. 143
Table 21: Bivariate Correlations and Reliabilities ................................................................ 145
Table 22: Survey Items Remained for Final Model............................................................... 146
Table 23: Overall Regression and Mediating Effect .............................................................. 147
Table 24: Structural Path Coefficients and R2 ....................................................................... 149
Table 25: Direct/Indirect Effects of Accountability Requirements ...................................... 155
Table 26: Results of Hypothesis Testing ................................................................................. 160

viii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Conceptual Model ........................................................................................................ 7
Figure 2: Percent of Worker Case-related Time ..................................................................... 15
Figure 3: Qualitative Content Analysis Process....................................................................... 58
Figure 4: The Analytical Framework ....................................................................................... 64
Figure 5: Characteristics of Accountability and Performance ............................................... 96
Figure 6: Accountability Management ................................................................................... 111
Figure 7: VDSS Regional Boundaries ..................................................................................... 119
Figure 8: Comparison of Mean ................................................................................................ 122
Figure 9: Comparison of Standard Deviation ........................................................................ 122
Figure 10: Histogram and P-P plot of “A_1” ......................................................................... 128
Figure 11: Histogram and P-P plot of “A1_Cubed” .............................................................. 128
Figure 12: EFA Procedure ....................................................................................................... 132
Figure 13: Measurement Model .............................................................................................. 141
Figure 14: Final Structural Model .......................................................................................... 151
Figure 15: Mediation Effect 1 .................................................................................................. 158
Figure 16: Mediation Effect 2 .................................................................................................. 159
Figure 17: AMP Model of Child Welfare ............................................................................... 168

ix
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. Problem Statement
Both government accountability1 and government performance have been central in public
management (Behn, 2001). The effort to enhance both values and mechanisms of public
organizations supports the rationale that the essence of public administration is ‘making
government work.’ Some use the terms “accountability” and “performance” interchangeably. It
is true that both terms blur into each other.2 For example, when a government adopts certain
public service assessment tools (e.g., budget reports), it is attempting either to enhance
accountability or improve performance. This dissertation distinguishes these terms as different
dimensions of public management (see Halachmi, 2002a, 2002b). Performance is about whether
resources have been used in the intended way in order to achieve greater efficiency,
effectiveness, and fairness (Brewer & Selden, 2000; Halachmi, 2002a, p. 371).3 Accountability,
by contrast, is defined as managing and meeting public and other expectations for performance
and responsiveness (Kearns, 1996; Romzek & Dubnick, 1987). Through these definitions, it is
possible to see that even though performance is satisfactory, accountability expectations may not
be met.
Performance measurement (Thomas, 2006) was designed to make bureaucracies work
better (Moynihan et al., 2011) and track accountability (Alexander, Brudney, & Yang, 2010; de

1 Throughout the dissertation, the term “accountability” is used interchangeably with the term “accountability
requirements,” “accountability expectations,” “accountability demands,” or “accountability pressures.”
2 Some studies use the term “performance accountability” or “performance-based accountability” (Moynihan &
Ingraham, 2003; Yang, 2011). Here, the term performance indicates a result-oriented accountability.
3 In the context of child welfare, performance is defined as “whether a system is functioning as intended, for
example, whether the right services are being delivered to the right people at the right time” (p.7) according to a
report from Casey Family Programs (Casey Family Programs, 2011).

1