Organizational barriers to transparency
| Author | Jean-Patrick Villeneuve,Martial Pasquier |
| DOI | 10.1177/0020852307075701 |
| Date | 01 March 2007 |
| Published date | 01 March 2007 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Organizational barriers to transparency: a typology and
analysis of organizational behaviour tending to prevent or
restrict access to information
Martial Pasquier and Jean-Patrick Villeneuve
Abstract
Transparency in the activities of government and public service agencies has
become a democratic sine qua non, legislated by access to information laws in
many countries. While these laws have increased the amount of information
available to the public, it is evident that numerous public organizations still try to
conceal information, although no public or private interest of any importance
justifies such behaviour. This article will develop a typology of these forms of
behaviour which will allow for a better understanding of the origins of such
dynamics and pave the way for a better evaluation of the point of equilibrium
between administrative privilege and transparency.
Points for practitioners
This article describes organizational strategies aimed at circumscribing the new
demands for transparency, particularly those relating to the laws governing access
to information. From international examples, it is clear that the present methods
(principally legal ones) obliging organizations to practise greater transparency
cannot fully achieve their purposes in the absence of a profound cultural change
in favour of the said transparency.
Keywords: access to information, governance, organization, public
administration, public management, transparency
Martial Pasquier is Professor at the Swiss Graduate School of Public Administration IDHEAP and
Jean-Patrick Villeneuve is Research Associate at Swiss Graduate School of Public Administration
IDHEAP. Translation of the article published in French under the title: ‘Les entraves à la transparence
documentaire. Établissement d’une typologie et analyse des comportements organisationnels con-
duisant à empêcher ou à restreindre l’accès à l’information’.
Copyright © 2007 IIAS, SAGE Publications (Los Angeles, London, New Delhi and Singapore)
Vol 73(1):147–162 [DOI:10.1177/0020852307075701]
International
Review of
Administrative
Sciences
Introduction
The concept of transparency has become established during recent decades as a
necessity in the fight against organizational and individual irregularities (corruption,
fraud, financial scandals) and in promoting good governance in organizations,
whether public or private (Transparency International, 2004). With regard to public
administration, the laws governing free access to the information held by the public
authorities and those concerning the openness of parliamentary debates, state
committees and agencies aim mainly to increase the transparency of governmental
activities. However, although obligated to show proof of transparency, it must be
said that state organizations often remain reluctant to freely and voluntarily divulge
information. This contribution attempts to arrive at a better understanding of the
irregular behaviour of public organizations faced with such demands for transparency
and to create the foundations for a redefinition of equilibrium between privilege and
transparency.
The first part of this article presents the fundamentals of organizational trans-
parency and access to information. The second part develops a typology of organi-
zational behaviour aimed at, or having as a consequence, a limitation of this
access. The third part, based on the typology developed, underlines organizations’
motivations for limiting access to information and, using all the elements described,
develops three criteria enabling a middle path to be charted between the proponents
of ‘less transparency to achieve greater transparency’ and those who defend com-
plete and total transparency.
1. Transparency and access to information
1.1 The issues involved in transparency
Transparency generally means the opening up of the internal organizational pro-
cesses and decisions to third parties, whether or not these third parties are involved
in the organization (Florini, 1998). It rests upon a non-negotiable right to know (Fung
et al., 2003; Pope, 2003; Open Government, 2004) made explicit in Article 19 of the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights.1This fundamental right is also at the heart of
the modern processes of accountability and the legitimization of public authorities
(Naurin, 2002). In addition to being a right, transparency must also be considered an
instrument insofar as it equates to organizational methods and processes enabling
the complete reversibility of information exchanges between the general public and
public sector organizations. By ‘reversibility’ should be understood moving from the
principle of absolute privilege and the discretionary use of information to a system
where privilege is the exception and one that, moreover, must be substantiated and
justified legally. This concept of information ‘reversibility’ in public organizations
significantly shifts the historical balance between privilege and transparency — the
root of a debate that is at the heart of current concerns.
Transparency is a very broad concept which applies to many areas (Pasquier and
Villeneuve, 2005): organizational transparency, accounting and budgetary trans-
parency, transparency of government action and responsibilities, as well as docu-
148 International Review of Administrative Sciences 73(1)
To continue reading
Request your trial