Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Creating Effective Rules through Green Tape (When to Write a Rule (rules…
Creating Effective Rules through Green Tape
Reconceptualizing Rule Effectiveness
rules are effective to the extent that they accomplish what public organizations intend
people are not passive recipients of organization structure; rather, they are active participants in creating the realities around it
rule effectiveness needs to be thought of more broadly: as achieving organizational purposes but also as a vehicle for eliciting voluntary cooperation through interactions between the individual and organization
Organizational purposes
must be front and center in conceptualizing effective organizational rules
Most organizational rules do not include written objectives
Even when objectives are explicit, rule outcomes (like other forms of public sector performance) are notoriously hard to measure
Sometimes rules arise from unclear and contradictory aims
voluntary cooperation
The behavioral dimension of the rules framework demonstrates that people can react to rules in a variety of ways that either support or undermine rule objectives
Even when rules are mostly followed, they can be rigidly or maliciously complied with, as well as bent or broken
many counterproductive rule behaviors arise from a coercive managerial mentality of favoritism, micromanagement, or unrealistic performance pressures, to name a few
effective rules must be defined by the extent to which they elicit voluntary rather than coerced behavior
Interaction
the final element of the revised conceptualization of effective organizational rules
Rules are points of interaction between employees and organizations that can affect organizational effectiveness, but these effects traverse far beyond the narrow confines of the rule. Rules empower and constrain employees, speaking volumes to an individual’s value, standing, and trustworthiness
Procedural fairness, legitimacy, and status-leveling alternately cement or fracture the emotional connection between employees and their organizations
These interactions between people and with the organization spark the level of cooperation with a rule likely to be achieved, as well as the sheer capacity of the organization to achieve the purpose of the rule and beyond
This conceptualization of rule effectiveness moves away from a command- and-control conception of rules and places employee reactions front and center
When to Write a Rule
rules arise in response to problems that have not been adequately addressed by other rules
Over time, organizations respond to problems by creating more rules (positive density dependence), which solve increasing numbers of problems so that fewer new rules are needed and the rate of rule-creation decreases (negative density dependence
Problems alone are not enough to prompt this manager to write a rule; it is problems that involve multiple people and for which solutions have been a empted
The notion that certain problems—those that are recurrent, consequential, or salient—are well-suited for rule-writing can be used as a practical guide for avoiding writing rules in response to extreme events, to a handful of people, or even to a particular employee
Reasonably certain solutions are the second condition for effective rule- writing
Appropriate rule-writing also depends on the clarity of organizational goals and the availability of technical knowledge for problem-solving
unwritten rules are well-suited for unimportant problems and unclear solution sets. Another possibility is that unwritten rules are more desirable when managers seek flexibility for solving problems
Rule Stakeholders
Cooperative behavior is essential for effective rules
Involving stakeholders in rule design is a logical starting point, but no small order to fill
solicit the input of people most affected by the rule, whether those people are employees, businesses, or citizens
A second justification for stakeholder involvement in rule design is to close the design-implementation gap that is created when rule-designers and rule- followers are two separate groups of people
A third rationale for stakeholder involvement in rule design is the potential for greater compliance from rule-followers
Stakeholder involvement in rule design also strengthens the relationship between managers and employees
Green Tape: Attributes of Effective Rule Design and Implementation
Beyond rule creation, rule effectiveness, and rule stakeholders, attention must also be paid to the nuts and bolts of effective rules, referred to here as “green tape.”
Green tape is a grounded theory of effective organizational rules based on the lived experiences of public employees and their encounters with rules
rule formalization, rule logic, consistent application, optimal control, and rule understanding
that effective rules—ones people will follow—possess both technical and social components
A well-designed rule with no followers is as ineffective as a poorly designed rule faithfully followed by all: both fail the organizational intent.
Rule Formalization
Rule formalization—both the process and outcome of putting rules into writing—is expected to increase the technical and social merits of an organizational rule
Given that rules can be both written and unwritten, the green tape framework suggests that written rules are more effective. Participants in the LGWS appear to concur: the more workplace rules are documented in writing, the more they are perceived as being effective
rule formalization triggers in-depth thinking about the design of the rule, to a higher degree than unwritten rules are capable of generating
the sheer act of formalization is inherently more transparent and more amenable to the input of a range of stakeholders
Having written rules legitimizes implementation and makes the rules easier to follow and enforce
Written rules are also raw material for enforcers, legitimizing authority, down- playing personal power, giving fair warning, and assigning blame to management for unpopular requirements
Rule Logic
Logic is at the core of rational thinking and a necessary attribute of green tape and contributor to the organizational dimension of rule effectiveness
Consistent Rule Application
Consistency is not about rule rigidity, but rather avoiding systematically exempting specific people or groups from the rules intended to cover them
Occasional rule exemptions are part and parcel of managerial discretion. But frequent and patterned rule inconsistency undercuts organizational purposes, alters individual perceptions, and triggers uncooperative rule behaviors
Consistency is a powerful dimension of the individual perspective on organizational rules. Rules applied to some people or groups and not to others inform perceptions of the extent to which the organization is procedurally fair
Procedural fairness is a concept tied closely with social identity theory: employees look for cues in the workplace environment to interpret their standing and worth within the organization
people make decisions based on past behavior by themselves or others
Optimal Control
emphasizes how rules minimize discretion and standardize organizational behavioral but in the process trigger ineffciency, morale problems, and counterproductive work behaviors
rules impose more than one level or type of control, with both positive and negative consequences
under-control, which imposes a level of constraint that is inadequate for achieving rule objectives. Under-control is problematic from all three perspectives of the organizational rules framework
For organizations, under-control is inefficient because it fails to achieve organizational objectives but nevertheless consumes resources