Beyond Simplification in Public Sector Accountability: Contradictions Between Principal‐Agent and Complexity Theories.
This conceptual study explores the complexity of public sector accountability, traditionally framed by principal‐agent theory (PAT), which simplifies relationships through rigid contracts. The findings reveal how PAT's assumptions often misalign with the intricate realities of public sector accounta...
| Publicado en: | Public Administration Review Vol. 85; no. 6; pp. 1757 - 1771 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Wiley-Blackwell
Nov/Dec2025
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ssf&AN=190222611&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ssf uiTerm: 190222611 longDbName: Social Sciences Full Text (H.W. Wilson) uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 00333352 PBA jtl: Public Administration Review issn: 00333352 maglogo: Y pubinfo: dt: Nov/Dec2025 vid: 85 iid: 6 pid: 480 pub: Wiley-Blackwell artinfo: ui: 190222611 10.1111/puar.13941 ppf: 1757 ppct: 14 formats: fmt: – @attributes: type: T – @attributes: type: C – @attributes: type: P size: 417KB tig: atl: Beyond Simplification in Public Sector Accountability: Contradictions Between Principal‐Agent and Complexity Theories. aug: au: Rajala, Tomi Jalonen, Harri affil: Norwegian School of Economics (NHH), Bergen, Norway University of Vaasa, Vaasa, Finland su: Scholarly method Public administration Government accountability Complexity (Philosophy) Research questions Contract theory sug: subj: Scholarly method Public administration Other General Government Support Government accountability Complexity (Philosophy) Research questions Contract theory keyword: complexity theories principal‐agent theory public accountability complexity theories principal‐agent theory public accountability ab: This conceptual study explores the complexity of public sector accountability, traditionally framed by principal‐agent theory (PAT), which simplifies relationships through rigid contracts. The findings reveal how PAT's assumptions often misalign with the intricate realities of public sector accountability, which are better explained by complexity theories (CT). Contradictions between PAT and CT assumptions are highlighted, underlining the need for more flexible and dynamic accountability frameworks. The study calls for further research to refine the concept of complexity‐based accountability and investigate tensions between practical accountability applications of PAT and CT. Such research could transform public administration practice and scholarship by better accommodating the complex realities of managing public services. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: N holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|