↓ 跳过正文

Ethnography

Getting the Priorities Straight: Public Values in AI Adoption

·567 字·2 分钟
Polihot 公共行政 AI Adoption Public Values Ethnography Public Organizations Public-Private Partnerships
PA — 2026-08-08 Original Getting the Priorities Straight: Public Values in AI Adoption Jinke M. Oostvogel, Matthew Young, Bram Klievink Abstract ABSTRACT Artificial Intelligence (AI) is adopted in public organizations as a transformative innovation, yet how value prioritizations unfold in AI adoption processes remains underexplored. Therefore, we ask: How do public values unfold in AI adoption processes in public organizations? We conducted a qualitative case study of an AI adoption process at the radiology department of a Dutch academic hospital after the decision to adopt is made and before implementation, using ethnographic fieldwork, interviews, and document analysis. Our findings highlight how public values and the AI adoption process are balanced in the transition from the initiation to the implementation stage. We find a recursive relationship between public values and the AI adoption process. We show an interplay of instrumental and intrinsic values. We highlight the importance of top‐down adoption decisions for how public values are perceived, and we show the importance of public organizations ensuring public values are safeguarded in public‐private partnerships.

When Coproduction Meets Professionalism: Toward a Conceptual Framework for Understanding Challenges of Lay Input

·911 字·2 分钟
Polihot 公共行政 Coproduction Professionalism Street-Level Bureaucracy Lay Input Ethnography
PA — 2026-05-28 Original When Coproduction Meets Professionalism: Toward a Conceptual Framework for Understanding Challenges of Lay Input Rikke Kolding Abstract ABSTRACT Coproduction is an established element in public service provision, linked to positive outcomes such as increased service quality and quantity. Realizing these outcomes requires skills and motivation from street‐level professionals and lay actors alike. Nevertheless, research has long questioned professionals' willingness to engage in coproduction because lay input challenges their professionalism. However, existing research often treats lay input as a uniform, challenging factor, overlooking the possibility that professionals may perceive it differently depending on the interaction. To respond to these challenges more effectively, the article develops a conceptual framework addressing the research question: When do street‐level professionals perceive lay input as a challenge to their professionalism? The article studies coproduction in the design phase, particularly the active input of clients in interactions with street‐level professionals. It identifies three key aspects of interactions that influence the extent to which lay input challenges professionalism: the type of, need for, and communication of lay input. Contrary to the existing literature, the findings highlight that different forms of input exist within interactions that vary in how much they challenge professionalism. These findings are based on an interpretive ethnographic study conducted in two Danish daycare centers, comprising 58 semi‐structured interviews with childcare professionals and parents and 42 days of participant observation. The case serves as an informative case due to the extensive coproduction related to core pedagogical matters. The article informs targeted professional training, managerial practices, and flexible policy frameworks that help professionals anticipate, interpret, and integrate lay input more effectively.

Who is this for? How felt accountability shapes the enactment of accountability in public service delivery

·527 字·2 分钟
Polihot 公共行政 Accountability Street-Level Bureaucracy Public Service Delivery Ethnography Felt Accountability
JPART 36/3 pp. 361-377 2026-05-07 Original Who is this for? How felt accountability shapes the enactment of accountability in public service delivery Margit Ernst Abstract Abstract What makes accountability work? To answer this question, public administration research has long focused on formal mechanisms—–rules, audits, and performance indicators—intended to ensure that public employees answer for their actions. Yet these mechanisms alone rarely determine how accountability plays out in practice. Rather, it depends on how they are recognized, internalized, and enacted by those expected to comply. This realization has spurred growing interest in how employees perceive and enact accountability in the context of public service delivery. Based on ethnographic fieldwork, this study unpacks how street-level bureaucrats navigate tensions between formal accountability demands and their internalized perceptions of accountability. The findings reveal how employees weigh, reinterpret, or reframe accountability based on what they perceive to be at stake. To conceptualize this, the article introduces a concentric model of accountability.