A Cross-Sectional Study on the Relationship Between Street-Level Bureaucrats’ Role Identity and Their Discretionary Decision-Making Practice toward Citizen-Clients

• Published date: 01 May 2023
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/00953997231157752
• Author: Didde Cramer Jensen,Michael Mulbjerg Pedersen
• Date: 01 May 2023
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/00953997231157752

Administration & Society

2023, Vol. 55(5) 868 –891

© The Author(s) 2023

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/00953997231157752

journals.sagepub.com/home/aas

Article

A Cross-Sectional Study

on the Relationship

Between Street-Level

Bureaucrats’ Role

Identity and Their

Discretionary Decision-

Making Practice toward

Citizen-Clients

Didde Cramer Jensen1

and Michael Mulbjerg Pedersen2

Abstract

This study tests the hypothesis that the role identity of street-level

bureaucrats is related to variation in their discretionary decisions in relation

to the behavior of citizen-clients. The study draws on crosssectional

survey data on 465 officers from prisons in Denmark. Results from the

study show a negative correlation between prison officers role identity as

formalistic (state-agent) and the likelihood of differentiating in response

to citizen-clients’ behavior. Correspondingly, the results shows a positive

relationship between informal rule identification (citizen-agent) and

differential responses against citizen-client behavior. The findings indicate

a causal relationship between street-level bureaucrats’ role identity and

their discretionary decisions.

1VIVE – The Danish Center for Social Science Research, Kobenhavn, Denmark

2Aarhus University, The Centre for Alcohol and Drug Research, Aarhus, Denmark

Corresponding Author:

Didde Cramer Jensen, VIVE – The Danish Center for Social Science Research, Herluf Trolles

Gade 11, Copenhagen K 1052, Denmark.

Email: dcj@vive.dk

1157752AAS0010.1177/00953997231157752Administration & SocietyJensen and Pedersen

research-article2023

Jensen and Pedersen 869

Keywords

street-level bureaucracy, discretionary decision-making practice, role

identity, interaction, citizen-client behavior

Introduction

Interactions with citizen-clients establish a defining characteristic for street-

level work (Hupe & Buffat, 2014), and, because street-level bureaucrats inter-

act with citizen-clients on a daily basis, the content of this interaction becomes

important for the delivery of public policy (Maynard-Moody & Musheno,

2000, 2003). However, interaction with citizen-clients is a dilemma-tainted

affair, as different notions of authority, responsibility, and accountability exist

in modern governance (Bartels, 2013; Hupe & Hill, 2007). On the one hand,

the norms of bureaucracy call for a specific and affectively neutral relationship

between street-level bureaucrats and citizen-clients (Meier, 2000). Bureaucrats

are required to manage their emotions (Vigoda-Gadot & Meisler, 2010), uphold

an impartial approach to citizen-clients and act based on professional expertise,

written rules and procedures (Bartels, 2013; Meier, 2000). On the other hand,

bureaucrats must be responsive to human needs and provide distinctive and

fully appropriate responses to individual citizen-clients and their respective

situations (Evans, 2014). Dubois (2010), when explaining how bureaucrats

must deal with such conflicting imperatives, labels this dichotomy “the two

bodies of the bureaucrat.”

According to Maynard-Moody and Musheno (2003, 2012), this tension

can be understood as a fundamental dilemma in the narrative understanding

of professional role identities that street-level bureaucrats can take on in their

job: “state-agent” versus “citizen-agent.” The state-agent narrative promotes

abidance to rules, training and formal procedures. In contrast to this, the citi-

zen-agent narrative promotes normative or cultural abidance, identifying

those who are worthy citizens-clients and those who are not.

According to Loyens et al. (2019), the role identities that street-level

bureaucrats take on in their work is important, as they may influence both the

way in which they interpret their encounters with citizen-clients, and the way

in which they respond to the behavior of citizen-clients (p. 87). On the basis

of insights from identity theory, we test whether or not the meaning that

street-level bureaucrats attach to their professional role identity may affect

the manner in which they interpret the behavior of citizen-clients. We ask: is

there a correlation between street-level bureaucrats’ role identity and their

discretionary response to citizen-client behavior?

Empirical studies demonstrate that street-level bureaucrats may let them-

selves be influenced by citizen-client behavior when they make discretionary