Street‐Level Leadership

• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/0033-3352.00054
• Date: 01 July 2001
• Published date: 01 July 2001
• Author: Conrad P. Rutkowski

Book Reviews 505

Street-Level Leadership

Conrad P. Rutkowski, a management and law enforcement consultant with the Institute for Applied Phenomenology, has served as an

executive assistant, aide, or administrator under two New York State Senate majority leaders, the governor of a state, and two

university presidents. His areas of expertise include leadership, criminal justice, and quality of life issues. Email: abmaphd@aol.com.

Conrad P. Rutkowski, Institute for Applied Phenomenology

Janet Coble Vinzant and Lane Crothers, Street-Level Leadership: Discretion

and Legitimacy in Front-Line Public Service (Washington, DC: Georgetown

University Press, 1998). 185 pp., $18.95 paper.

There are perhaps few other con-

cepts or terms more antithetical to one

another than democracy and bureau-

cracy. Yet the authors of Street-Level

Leadership set for themselves the am-

bitious task of bridging the gap be-

tween them. The authors begin their

odyssey with the implicit assumption

that leadership can be and is exercised

by public servants at the street level.

In doing so, they offer a new model of

leadership which these public servants

can make use of to understand what it

is that they do, how they go about do-

ing it, and how they can assess its

qualitative nature (ix–x). Thus, lead-

ership at the street level “embodies

questions of discretion, power, and le-

gitimacy” (6). The authors also go a

step beyond other leadership models

by adding a normative component to

judgments of leadership.

They do this by relying on case

studies developed through their obser-

vation of certain public servants as the

latter did their jobs over a somewhat

extended period of time. Through

these case studies the authors invest,

nay empower, these street level public

servants with tools whereby in exer-

cising discretion all can rightly judge

the effectiveness and goodness of their

acts. The public servants in question

are police officers and social workers.

Why these? Because in the authors’

view they “encounter difficult deci-

sions and regularly use discretion as

they do their jobs” (6). It is the combi-

nation and interplay of these two ele-

ments that they contend allows for the

exercise of leadership on their part.

There are many things to commend

this work. There is a very fine analy-

sis of the nature of discretion and how

and to what degree it is bound with

the issue of legitimacy. In formulat-

ing a new model of leadership they

provide a comprehensive review and

analysis of the existing models of pub-

lic service. In doing so, they identify

the strengths and weaknesses of each

and relate them to contemporary situ-

ations. This is accompanied by an ap-

propriate use of the relevant literature

(54–67).

The Vinzant/Crothers leadership

model is a two dimensional matrix di-

vided into four quadrants representing

four different types of leadership. The

kind of leadership that is exercised

includes “1) those involving no sub-

stantial or limited discretion; 2) those

involving choices about process; 3)

those requiring decisions about out-

comes; or 4) those demanding choices

about process and outcomes” (91). The

different types arise as a result of the

interplay between the degree of dis-

cretion being exercised on the one

hand, and its interplay with the vari-

ables of process and outcome, on the

other. Interestingly, type 1–administra-

tive procedure, does not qualify as

leadership (92). The actual leadership

types are situational, transformational,

and transformational/situational (91).

Quite significantly, the authors also

review and carefully evaluate the four

generally accepted models of leader-

ship but note simultaneously that

there “is not even one commonly ac-

cepted definition of what leadership

is” (72). Yet, using all of this as a base,

they proceed to construct their own

model. They begin by asking the

question: “Do leaders require an ethi-

cal base for action?” (72). Their an-

swer: an unqualified yes! Noting de-

ficiencies of the existing models they

point to accountability and values

consideration as crucial elements.

They are, however, only part of a

larger whole. “To portray the chal-

lenges and demands these [street

level] workers face as being simply a

matter of morality, ethics, institu-

tional and regime values, bureaucratic

responsibility, professionalism, or

good judgment is incomplete. It is all

those things simultaneously” (73,

emphasis added by reviewer). Once

again, there is careful recourse to and

critical use of the existing literature

in the field with respect to leadership.

This book achieves a great deal and

ought to be considered noteworthy

simply on the basis of its prudential

review of the relevant works on mod-