Subnational Government Performance: Testing Multiple Dimensions of Governors' Experience
Author | Johabed G. Olvera,Claudia N. Avellaneda |
DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13035 |
Published date | 01 May 2019 |
Date | 01 May 2019 |
Subnational Government Performance: Testing Multiple Dimensions of Governors’ Experience 383
Abstract: This article tests whether governors’ work experience explains their state performance. Although the
experience-performance relationship has been researched, empirical studies report inconsistent results. This
inconsistency might be due to the dissimilar conceptualization and operationalization of the work experience construct,
for it can be conceptualized in qualitative or quantitative components. To address this disparity, the authors follow
Tesluk and Jacob’s conceptualization by operationalizing gubernatorial experience across three dimensions: type
(qualitative component), number of jobs, and years of work experience (quantitative component). The study tests
the moderating effects of state context (level of violence) on the experience-performance relationship, relying on data
derived from 32 Mexican states over 16 years. Education outputs (high school enrollment) and health outcomes (infant
mortality rate) are used to assess state performance. Results indicate that only the qualitative dimension of governors’
work experience boosts state performance by reducing infant mortality and increasing high school enrollment.
However, this positive effect is undermined by state violence. The number of jobs decreases gubernatorial performance,
magnified by the degree of state violence.
Evidence for Practice
• A chief executive’s work experience can be conceptualized and operationalized across three dimensions:
tenure, type of work, and number of jobs.
• The impact of chief executives’ work experience on performance is contingent on the dimension of work
experience.
• While a chief executive’s number of jobs fails to boost performance, type of experience (local and state)
increases performance.
• Challenging context, such as violence, undermines the positive effect of experience on performance.
Johabed G. Olvera
Indiana University Bloomington
Claudia N. Avellaneda
Indiana University Bloomington
Subnational Government Performance: Testing Multiple
Dimensions of Governors’ Experience
Research Article
With the adoption of decentralization,
subnational governments have become
responsible for planning, funding, and
implementing social programs. Despite having
common responsibilities and comparable funding
transfers from central governments, subnational
governments vary in their performance across several
indicators. For example, the states of Morelos,
Zacatecas, and Puebla in Mexico have relatively
higher levels of education enrollment (see figure 1),
while Zacatecas, Baja California, and Yucatán have
the lowest levels of infant mortality among states
(see figure 2). We ask, What explains subnational
government performance?
Considerable scholarship has addressed the
determinants of government performance (Boyne
2003). Scholars have identified several drivers, including
political competition (Boyne 1998; Hilke 1993),
human and material resources (Meier and Keiser 1996;
Sharkansky 1967), organizational structure (Bohte and
Meier 2000; Lan and Rainey 1992; Whetten 1978),
monitoring mechanisms (Wolf 1993), networking and
intergovernmental cooperation (Agranoff and McGuire
2003; O’Toole 2015), and managerial variables
such as strategy, leadership, and human resource
management (Andrews and Boyne 2010; Boyne and
Walker 2005; Brewer and Selden 2000; Weisman and
Nathanson 1985). Managerial quality contributes to
government performance because qualified managers
are better equipped to take advantage of opportunities,
address challenges, maneuver difficult situations, and
exploit networks (Avellaneda 2009, 2012). These
qualification differences among chief executives explain
organizational actions (Boyne 2004; Hambrick 2007;
Hambrick and Mason 1984; Lynn 2003).1 Among the
background qualifications that contribute to managerial
quality, experience has received considerable attention
(Avellaneda 2009, 2012; Carmeli 2006; Meier and
O’Toole 2002; Petrovsky, James, and Boyne 2015).
Nevertheless, studies report inconsistent results for the
experience-performance relationship.
Public Administration Review,
Vol. 79, Iss. 3, pp. 383–398. © 2019 by
The American Society for Public Administration.
DOI: 10.1111/puar.13035.
Claudia N. Avellaneda is associate
professor in the School of Public and
Environmental Affairs at Indiana University
Bloomington. Her research interests include
public management and governance
in developing countries as well as local
governments, mayoral leadership, public
policy, and comparative politics with a
regional focus on Latin America. Her current
research examines the determinants of local
and subnational government performance
in Latin America, highlighting the role
of mayors’ and governors’ background,
innovation, networking, and decision making.
E-mail: cavellan@indiana.edu
Johabed G. Olvera is a PhD candidate
in the School of Public and Environmental
Affairs at Indiana University Bloomington.
Her research interests include public policy
analysis, implementation, and management
in Latin America. She specializes in health
programs implemented by subnational and
local governments targeting vulnerable
population. Her current research looks
at the impact of healthcare interventions
aimed at improving maternal and infant
health and the role of managers and street-
level bureaucrats in program performance.
E-mail: jolverae@indiana.edu
384 Public Administration Review • May | J une 2 019
This may be due to the conceptualization and operationalization of
experience. Most studies assess managerial experience in quantitative
terms, equating it with tenure and operationalizing it with “years
of experience.” But few works test the qualitative dimension of
experience, and fewer still test the performance effects of both
qualitative and quantitative experience measures (Quiñones, Ford,
and Teachout 1995; Tesluk and Jacobs 1998). This scarcity is more
evident in the public sector. Therefore, this study’s first contribution
is to test the effect of three dimensions of experience on performance,
using qualitative and quantitative measures of experience.
Inconsistent results also may be due to few tests of the moderating
effects of context on the experience-performance relationship (Meier,
Rutherford, and Avellaneda 2017). According to Tesluk and Jacobs,
“contextual factors can moderate the influence of experience because
specific situations influence what individuals can extract from work
experiences” (1998, 332–33). Consequently, our second contribution
is to test the indirect effects of experience by assessing the moderating
effect of context on the experience-performance relationship.
We assess government performance in terms of education outputs
(high school enrollment) and health outcomes (infant mortality
rate, or IMR). We rely on data derived from 32 Mexican states
over 16 years. We selected the Mexican case for several reasons.
First, the Mexican decentralization process in the 1980s and 1990s
changed the balance of political power toward subnational and local
governments (Falleti 2010), extending states’ fiscal and political
autonomy. States are responsible for delivering key public services
(Hernández Rodríguez 2008; Langston 2010). This increased
gubernatorial autonomy and power decentralization make Mexico
an appropriate setting in which to investigate whether governors’
backgrounds influence state performance. Although a considerable
literature addresses the role of Mexican governors (Hernández
Rodríguez 2008), no empirical studies exist, to our knowledge, on
the drivers of gubernatorial performance in Mexican states. Our
third contribution is to test the experience-performance relationship
at the subnational level in a developing setting with a democracy
characterized by a long-lasting hegemonic party system.
Our results demonstrate, after controlling for time and state- and
governor-specific factors, that governors’ experience is positively
correlated with performance. The effects of gubernatorial experience
are contingent on its operationalization. Only the qualitative
dimension of work experience boosts state performance by reducing
IMR and increasing high school enrollment. However, this positive
effect is undermined by state violence. The number of jobs decreases
gubernatorial performance, magnified by the degree of state violence.
First, we define “experience.” Next, we elaborate on the
experience-performance relationship by presenting the
theoretical underpinnings supporting our hypotheses. Then, we
describe our case selection and outcome variables, as well as the
operationalization and justification of control variables. Finally, we
present the results, discussion, limitations, and conclusions.
Figure 1 High School Enrollment for Mexican States (1995-2010)
To continue reading
Request your trial