The person-policy fit model: The relationship between public service motivation, rebelliousness, perceived meaninglessness and willingness to change

Policy is nothing but a paper tiger until it is implemented. Therefore, it is not surprising that many public administration scholars have devoted themselves to studying policy implementation, including its challenges (Hill... [ view full abstract ]

Policy is nothing but a paper tiger until it is implemented. Therefore, it is not surprising that many public administration scholars have devoted themselves to studying policy implementation, including its challenges (Hill and Hupe, 2009; Lipsky, 1980; Fernandez, 2015). The importance of public professionals in the implementation process has been emphazised by scholars, for example in theory on street-level bureaucracy (Lipsky, 1980). Moreover, the willingness to implement of public professionals is seen as essential for policy change (Wright, Christensen & Isett, 2013; Riccucci, 2005). In recent research, the individual characteristics of public professionals have been linked to perceptions concerning implementation (Callen et al. 2012; Tummers et al., 2012; Wright et al., 2013). These findings are consistent with person-environment fit theory which theoretically connects the individual to its context (Vandenabeele & Van Loon, 2015; Kristof-Brown, Zimmerman, & Johnson, 2005).
In this paper it is argued that in governmental organizations a particular type of person-environment fit is found, a person-policy fit, in which public professionals’ personality traits such as reactance, public service motivation and the perceived meaninglessness of the policy interact and are essential for the willingness to implement. This leads to the following research question: What is the influence of reactance, public service motivation, and perceived meaninglessness on the willingness of public professionals to implement new public policies?
The data upon which this research is based have been collected among health care professionals (N= 1317) by means of a survey. Post-hoc analysis demonstrated the data to be representative for the Dutch population of this group. The measures used for the independent variables in this research have been validated for psychometric characteristics. The measures were based upon previously developed measures (Vandenabeele, 2008; Tummers et al. 2012; Shen and Dillard, 2005; Metselaar, 1997). The hypothesis have been tested by conducting a three-way multiple moderated regression (Jaccard and Turisi, 1990).
The preliminary results of this paper show that the relationship between perceived meaninglessness and willingness to change is moderated by public service motivation. Thus, public service motivation strenghtens the relationship between perceived meaninglessness and willingness to change. This means that in cases in which low levels of perceived meaninglessness are reported, higher levels of public service motivation increase the willingness to change. In contrast, in cases in which high levels of perceived meaninglessness are reported, higher levels of public service motivation decrease the willingness to change.
Furthermore, public service motivation, client meaninglessness and reactance are part of a significant three-way interaction in which the trait reactance neutralises the moderation between public service motivation and perceived meaninglessness. Thus, public professionals who report high levels of reactance are barely influenced by varying levels of public service motivation. However, public professionals with low levels of reactance are influenced by varying levels of public service motivation in the manner mentioned above.