| Public administration scholars and practitioners have long been interested in bureaucracy as a system of organization. Formal rules and rule following are widely held as its defining characteristics. However, few studies focus explicitly on the unintended behavioral consequences of formal rules, in particular rule breaking, within the public administration literature. This research investigates the rule breaking of frontline public employees or "street-level bureaucrats," making novel distinctions between the underlying motives associated with attitudes toward noncompliance as well as self-reported violations of formal work rules. Specifically, traditional conceptualizations of the solely self-interested, utility-maximizing worker found in theories such as agency and transaction cost economics are contrasted with a view of the worker whose goals are not always incongruent with those of the organization and its stakeholders. Pro-social rule breaking (e.g., "I break the rule to better serve my clients" or "to help my coworkers with their duties") and destructive rule breaking (e.g., "I break the rule to lessen my workload") are approached as distinct organizational phenomena, with differing implications for management and workplace rule development. A framework of individual, relational, and organizational predictors associated with workplace deviance and citizenship behaviors in various literatures is investigated. Child welfare social workers of a state government agency in the Southeastern US were surveyed using an original questionnaire (n=288; 45% response). Preliminary analysis indicates public employees report favorable general attitudes toward workplace rule breaking at higher levels than actual rule breaking behaviors. Results show the framework models rule breaking behaviors and the favorability of attitudes toward rule breaking in different ways. Analysis suggests classic deterrence mechanisms (certainty of detection, severity of punishment) and supervisory relationships are the most important factors influencing prosocial rule breaking, whereas destructive rule breaking is largely influenced by individual factors and relationships with coworkers and direct supervisors. Implications for public managers, contributions to the public administration and rules literatures, and directions for future research are discussed. |
