Hybridizing the institutional logics of performance improvement and budgetary stewardship in English and Welsh local government
| DOI | 10.1177/0952076718781433 |
| Author | Laurence Ferry,Peter Eckersley |
| Date | 01 January 2020 |
| Published date | 01 January 2020 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Article
Hybridizing the
institutional logics
of performance
improvement and
budgetary stewardship
in English and Welsh
local government
Laurence Ferry
Durham University Business School, UK
Peter Eckersley
Nottingham Trent University, UK
Abstract
This article introduces and applies a three-stage process to show how advocates of the
conflicting institutional logics of budgetary st ewardship and performance improvement in
English and Welsh local authorities created a hybrid logic. Drawing on interviews with
officers in 25 councils, it demonstrates how cooperative working environments meant that
hybridization proceeded largely ‘peacefully’, in contrast to previous studies of more com-
petitive contexts that found it occurs on a ‘battlefield’. We argue that the nature of conflict
within the hybridization process, along with the power dynamics between representatives
of different logics, shapes the nature and sustainability of the resulting hybrid.
Keywords
Budgetary stewardship, England and Wales, hybrids, institutional logics, local govern-
ment, performance improvement
Introduction
Scholars studying mergers, partnerships or the introduction of new management tech-
niques have often argued that organizations develop ‘hybrids’ of previously-conflicting
Public Policy and Administration
2020, Vol. 35(1) 45–64
!The Author(s) 2018
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/0952076718781433
journals.sagepub.com/home/ppa
Corresponding author:
Peter Eckersley, Nottingham Trent University, 50 Shakespeare Street, Nottingham NG1 4FQ, UK.
Email: peter.eckersley@ntu.ac.uk
‘institutional logics’, which subsequently influence decision-making and organizational
behaviour (Miller and Kurunmaki, 2011). In the public sector, these hybrids are often
the consequence of macro-level institutional pressures emanating from neo-liberalism
and New Public Management (NPM), which emphasize private sector managerial
ideas and thereby challenge traditional notions of public service at the meso (or
‘field’) level of relations between central government and local public bodies. The
hybrid, which operates at the organizational level, incorporates elements from both
conflicting logics (Grohs 2014; Mullins, 2006; Pillay et al., 2017).
Hybrids invariably involve compromise; this article examines how the advocates
of conflicting logics agree to accommodate each other’s perspectives. In line
with DiMaggio (1983), the literature tends to assume that this is an inherently
competitive process. Scholars have even adopted military metaphors to evoke
the idea of ‘institutional warfare’ (Hoffmann, 1999), in which they struggle for
supremacy on a ‘battlefield’ (Reay and Hinings, 2005; Seo and Creed, 2002).
Yet, although many studies have focused on public bodies, they have not examined
whether this ‘battlefield’ characterization applies in such organizations, where
decision-making cultures are often more cooperative than in the private sector
(Agranoff, 2006; Ahrens and Ferry, 2016; Argento et al., 2010; Heclo and
Wildavsky, 1974). Instead, they tend to concentrate on how organizations try to
manage the internal conflicts inherent in such a hybrid arrangement after it has
become established (Grossi et al., 2017), or the way in which individual actors
exploit tensions to effect change (Dahan, 2015).
Indeed, as Skelcher and Smith (2015: 434) highlight, ‘the public administration
and nonprofit literature ...still lacks a clear theoretical foundation that can
explain what it is that creates a hybrid, whether different forms of hybrid emerge
in different situations, and if so what consequences arise’. With this in mind, we
asked ourselves the questions: are advocates of different logics always competing
with each other, even in contexts where cooperation is commonplace, and how do
these interactions shape the resulting hybrid? Based on our fieldwork findings, we
then hoped to generate further hypotheses (Lijphardt, 1971) associated with how
working cultures might shape the process of hybridization, and ultimately influence
the nature of hybrid logics.
To address this puzzle, we examined the process of hybridization in English and
Welsh local authorities. Since the 1970s, councils in both countries have been
characterised by an institutional logic of budgetary stewardship, and therefore
rely heavily on management tools that monitor revenues, expenditure and other
financial indicators (Coombs and Edwards, 1995; Ferry et al., 2017). From 1997
onwards, however, the UK and Welsh Governments sought to introduce a logic of
performance improvement into local authorities, along with its associated toolbox of
targets, indicators, performance reporting, benchmarking and ‘league tables’.
Notably, a recent study of public services in large US cities found that cost
accounting was negatively correlated with a focus on performance, and therefore
shows how these logics conflict with (rather than complement) each other
(Mohr, 2016). As such, the stage appeared set for a ‘battle’ between the advocates
46 Public Policy and Administration 35(1)
To continue reading
Request your trial