Search results

This paper aims to demonstrate the efforts of Hay Youssef and Tang (2019) to reaffirm the importance of managerial discretion is unsuccessful.

Theoretical frameworks from traditional and recent literature on the concept of managerial discretion are related to corporate governance scholarship.

There are in fact no studies on managerial discretion based on explicit theoretical and empirical definitions and thus no studies published which have measured the degrees of managers’ discretion. The conclusion is that the inability to define the notion of managerial discretion is tantamount to the inability to research it.

Research on managerial discretion does not provide any advice to owners and directors of boards on granting top executives a high or a low degree of discretion.

This paper reaffirms the conclusion of Andersen (2017) that corporate governance scholarship will improve if it abandons the concept of managerial discretion.

This study addresses the debate regarding employee discretion and neo-normative forms of control within interactive service work. Discretion is central to core and long-standing debates within the sociology of work and organizations such as skill, control and job quality. Yet, despite this, the concept of discretion remains underdeveloped. We contend that changes in the nature of work, specifically in the context of interactive service work, require us to revisit classical theorizations of discretion. The paper elaborates the concept of value discretion; defined as the scope for employees to interpret the meaning of the espoused values of their organization. We illustrate how value discretion provides a foundational basis for further forms of task discretion within a customized service call-centre. The study explores the link between neo-normative forms of control and the labour process by elaborating the concept of value discretion to provide new insights into the relationship between managerial control and employee agency within contemporary service labour processes.

Village health volunteers are community health volunteers in Thailand that have helped the government deliver public health services for many years, particularly during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Though labeled as “volunteers,” the village health volunteers are recruited, trained and supervised in a manner similar to how a government agency recruits, trains and supervises its street-level bureaucrats (SLBs). This study examines the two factors that affect how these street-level quasi-bureaucrats use their professional discretion: transformational leadership and public service motivation (PSM). Transformational leadership means a leadership style that develops, shares and sustains a vision to elevate SLBs to higher levels of performance, while PSM is defined as an SLB’s predisposition to make a difference by working in the public sector with a sense of calling. This study attempts to analyze the mediating role of psychological empowerment in the relationship between transformational leadership, PSM and professional discretion.

The paper uses a three-wave survey-based quantitative method to avoid common method biases. This method provides evidence gathered from 105 subdistrict health promotion hospitals and 798 village health volunteers (VHVs) in five provinces in Thailand.

PSM and transformational leadership influence the village health volunteers' use of professional discretion indirectly through the psychological empowerment mechanisms that make them feel positive toward their village health volunteer role and responsibility. The authors' findings suggest that the hospital directors' transformational leadership induces the village health volunteers' use of professional discretion by making them feel competent to do their work and feel fulfilled and valuable about their work. Similarly, the village health volunteers' PSM leads them to use professional discretion by making them feel fulfilled and valuable and by convincing them of the social and community impact of their work.

While existing research focuses on VHVs' role in alleviating capacity constraints on the health care system, this study revealed an equally important role played by hospital directors. These directors' transformational leadership was instrumental in enhancing VHVs' psychological empowerment – particularly their perceptions of the meaning of their work and their competence – that ultimately enabled them to use professional discretion in their work. This study also highlighted the importance of VHVs' PSM, which leads to their use of professional discretion via the meaning and impact dimensions of psychological empowerment. Based on this study, PSM should also be incorporated into the community health volunteers' recruitment criteria. Also, public health agencies should consider including transformational leadership in the hospital directors' training programs and their promotion criteria.

As VHVs' high-PSM level was found to enhance their professional discretion, the process of recruiting ordinary citizens to serve as community health volunteers should incorporate assessment of the candidates' PSM. Also, the Ministry of Public Health should design and assign tasks that citizen volunteers, particularly VHVs, consider meaningful and at which they feel competent.

Aside from technical training, directors of the subdistrict health promotion hospitals should regularly receive soft skill training (i.e. leadership training) and transformational leadership characteristics should be included in the government criteria for promotion.

While past research has examined the impact of other leadership styles on psychological empowerment, this study took a further step by examining the mediating effects of psychological empowerment on the relationship between transformational leadership and professional discretion among VHVs. The authors analyzed the mechanism linking PSM to the VHVs' professional discretion. In addition, by examining the relative importance of different dimensions of psychological empowerment, this study offers a nuanced understanding of the psychological processes by which transformational leadership and PSM shape the SLBs' use of professional discretion in their work.

Financial analysts act as crucial conduits of information between firms and stakeholders. However, comparatively little is known about how these information intermediaries evaluate the believability and importance of corporate disclosures. We argue that a firm’s level of managerial discretion, or latitude of executive action, acts as a cue for financial analysts, which helps them interpret and respond to voluntary management earnings forecasts. Our study provides strong, robust evidence that financial analysts find management forecasts significantly less believable in low-discretion than in high-discretion environments, and therefore tend to be much less responsive to these forecasts. We also show that managerial discretion is especially impactful on analysts’ responses in those circumstances where analysts are typically most uncertain about how to interpret management forecasts.

This study provides an empirical analysis of the relationship between job design and the labor-market environment in which firms operate. In particular, I focus on one aspect of job design: the extent to which employees have discretion (autonomy) to organize their work. There has been considerable emphasis in the last 20 years on the importance of “high-involvement” work practices, which seek to give employees more decision rights at work. This literature has been concerned with the introduction of work practices such as team work, job rotation, or quality circles, and with the use of performance pay contracts. Within this literature, there are also some studies that focus more particularly on the extent to which employees have job discretion or autonomy. Discretion is an important characteristic of jobs because much of the redesign effort that has been conducted in the last years has aimed at giving employees more power to make decisions at work, and performance gains are largely attributed to these changes.

Managerial constraint is a central theme in strategic management research. Although discussed using a variety of labels (including choice and determinism) and theoretical perspectives (including resource dependence and population ecology), the common question is the degree to which executives have choices or options when making decisions. Two of the most commonly used approaches for discussing constraint are organizational task environments (Dess & Beard, 1984) and managerial discretion (Hambrick & Finkelstein, 1987). These two papers share substantial commonalities in both their theoretical background and operationalization, raising the question of whether discretion and task environment are indeed separate constructs. This chapter reviews both conceptual and methodological issues associated with the use of task environment and discretion. Drawing on a review of published studies and original data analysis, we offer methodological suggestions for future research.

The theory of managerial discretion and the direct insights it provides in the understanding of the varying impact strategic and operational actions have on organizational change and business fortunes is an area of research potential underexplored in the UK. This study aims to establish whether the measurement of managerial discretion is constant between the two similar societal corporate frameworks of the UK and the USA listed markets.

The extant managerial discretion ranking model, established in the USA, is empirically assessed for its validity and effectiveness across a sample of high- and low-discretion companies from the FTSE 350.

Using accounting measures, a clear and significant difference is established between UK high and low managerial discretion entities. The results prove to be significant in enabling the differential comparative analysis of the institutional characteristics of corporates.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, no study of this nature has been conducted previously in the UK context. While the original model developed in the USA is now several decades old, the UK results reflect similar industry rankings as found originally in the USA, subject to some differences considered to be a result of the changing nature of global business since the 1990s. This study opens a new seam of novel research, which has the potential to uncover, at a granular level, the differential mores and character of management ethics, styles and practices in such issues as organizational change, corporate culture, governance and social responsibility.

The objective of this research is to analyze the extent to which street-level bureaucrats (SLBs) have exercised discretion (low, medium and high) and the contributing factors involved (i.e. the influence of personal, work environment and demographic factors on the exercise of discretion).

The mixed-methods research uses the embedded design approach. Data were collected during the COVID-19 pandemic through a survey of 2,867 Official Certifier of Title Deeds (Pejabat Pembuat Akta Tanah/PPAT) as SLBs spread across fifty regencies/cities in ten provinces in Indonesia.

This field study found a significant and positive correlation between SLBs' economic motive and the client's knowledge of land issues with the exercise of discretion. In addition, the study found a significant correlation between the age and gender of SLBs and their practice of discretion.

This study provides insights into that new policies should not further complicate the system but reduce face-to-face interactions between SLBs and their clients by allowing digital technology.

The novelty of this research is the paradox of SLB service during the COVID-19 pandemic differed from the paradoxes identified in earlier studies. SLBs commonly cope with service paradox by limiting their services or focusing solely on the most profitable clientele. However, this study shows that some SLBs actively reach out to clients using a “friendly” service model.

Seeks to examine how far Michael Lipsky's theory of discretion as it relates to public sector professionals as “street‐level bureaucrats” is still applicable in the light of public sector reform and in particular the introduction of increased managerial control over professionals.

The main thesis in Lipsky's work, Street‐Level Bureaucracy, that street‐level bureaucrats devise their own rules and procedures to deal with the dilemmas of policy implementation is linked to public sector reform over the past 25 years or so. The article differentiates between three forms of discretion, rule, task and value and assesses the extent to which these different forms of discretion have been compromised by reform. Examples are drawn principally from the literature on school teachers and social workers

The findings suggest that the rule‐making (hence bureaucratic) capacity of professionals at street‐level is much less influential than before although it is questionable whether or not the greater accountability of professionals to management and clarity of the targets and objectives of organisations delivering public policy has liberated them from the dilemmas of street‐level bureaucracy.

The work has focussed on the UK and in particular on two professions. However, it may be applied to any country which has undergone public sector reform and in particular where “new public management” processes and procedures have been implemented. There is scope for in‐depth studies of a range of occupations, professional and otherwise in the UK and elsewhere.

Policy makers and managers should consider how far the positive aspects of facilitating discretion in the workplace by reducing the need for “rule‐making” to cope with dilemmas have been outweighed by increased levels of bureaucracy and the “de‐skilling” of professionals.

Lipsky's much cited and influential work is evaluated in the light of public sector reform some 25 years since it was published. The three forms of discretion identified offer the scope for their systematic application to the workplace.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the moderating effect of discretion and social capital on the relationship between individual perceptions of team conflict and employee-level outcomes. The authors propose that both employee discretion and unit-level social capital influence the negative effects of perceived conflict on employee stress and turnover intentions. They argue that an individual’s perceptions of these central organizational characteristics are likely to alter the consequences associated with conflict and the manner in which individuals respond to it.

This study empirically tests the moderating effects of discretion and unit-level social capital on the relationship between individual’s perception of team conflict and employee-level outcomes. Analysis was conducted with survey data from a sample of health care care providers in 90 units across 20 nursing home organizations. We applied hierarchical linear modeling analyses to test our hypotheses.

Results demonstrate that employee discretion moderates the relationship between perceived task conflict and job stress. Unit-level social capital was shown to moderate the relationship between perceived relationship conflict and employee turnover intentions. Our findings also document a varied moderation effect at low to moderate levels of conflict versus high levels of conflict. This finding suggests that the moderating role of contextual variables is more nuanced and complex than the existing conceptual frameworks acknowledge.

This study contributes to the research on conflict and conflict management by extending a multilevel approach to the effect of conflict and by providing new insights regarding the contextual manner in which conflict affects workplace outcomes.

The effects of discretion and unit-level social capital on how conflict is metabolized by organizations and their members varied. Contextual factors matter differently for different individual level outcomes. In attempting to manage the consequences associated with workplace conflict, organizations and their managers must consider different contextual factors.

This study contributes to the research on conflict and its management in organization by providing new insights regarding the contextual manner in which conflict affects organizational and individual outcomes. This study provides support for the claim that the relational and task-related context under which employees experience conflict affects employee stress levels and the extent to which they report their intentions to leave the organization.