Article critique

Representative Bureaucracy: Exploring the Potential for Active Representation in Local Government

Mark D. Bradbury Appalachian State University

J. Edward Kellough University of Georgia

ABSTRACT

The theory of representative bureaucracy suggests that a demographically diverse public

sector workforce (passive representation) will lead to policy outcomes that reflect the

interests of all groups represented, including historically disadvantaged communities (active

representation). Implicit in the passive-active link is the expectation that minority public

administrators, in particular, will have similar attitudes to minority citizens on issues of critical

import and relevance to those citizens, and those attitudes, in turn, will influence policy

decisions. This research examines the attitudes of citizens and administrators on a series of

survey items focused on the responsibilities of local government administrators to advocate

for the interests of the African-American community. The survey results confirm the hypoth-

esis that African-American citizens and administrators are more likely than white citizens and

administrators to support governmental behaviors that specifically target the interests of the

African-American community and that African-American citizens and administrators hold

markedly different attitudes from white administrators. Most significantly, attitude congru-

ence with the views of African-American citizens by administrators is shown to be a signif-

icant predictor of the adoption of an African-American representative administrative role,

overwhelming the influence of other variables including race.

As is widely understood, the theory of representative bureaucracy suggests that diversity

within the public workforce, especially in terms of characteristics such as race and eth-

nicity, will help to ensure that the interests of diverse groups are represented in policy

formulation and implementation processes. 1 Stated more formally, the theory holds that

‘‘passive representation, or the extent to which a bureaucracy employs people of diverse

Address correspondence to the author at [email protected].

1 The interests of women may be represented in this manner well. See, for example, work by Keiser et al. (2002)

and Dolan (2000, 2002) on that question. Although recognizing that representative bureaucracy may operate to the

benefit of women, the current analysis focuses on the issue of the representation of racial minority, specifically

African-American, interests.

doi:10.1093/jopart/mum033 Advance Access publication on November 4, 2007

ª The Author 2007. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, Inc. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: [email protected]

JPART 18:697–714

at P ennsylvania S

tate U niversity on M

ay 10, 2016 http://jpart.oxfordjournals.org/

D ow

nloaded from

demographic backgrounds, will lead to active representation, or the pursuit of policies

reflecting the interests and desires of those people’’ (Selden 1997b, 5; see also Krislov

1967; Krislov and Rosenbloom 1981; Mosher 1968). 2 This connection occurs, according to

the theory, because the demographic and social backgrounds of individual bureaucrats

influence their socialization experiences and the development of attitudes, values, and

opinions that ultimately affect their decisions on policy issues (Meier 1993b; Saltzstein

1979). As a result, the theory suggests that when the bureaucracy is representative of the

public, policy decisions will, in general, be broadly reflective of the public interest. 3

An important group of empirical studies has confirmed the linkage between passive

and active representation (see Hindera 1993a, 1993b; Keiser et al. 2002; Meier 1993a;

Meier and Stewart 1992; Selden 1997b), but this research has necessarily been limited to

the examination of contexts where (1) minority interests are known or can be inferred,

(2) specific minority decision makers can be identified, and (3) decisions on issues relevant

to minority interests can be isolated and linked back to particular decision makers. Because

of these limitations, the full extent of active representation may be greater than that

revealed by earlier work. An absence of identifiable policy outcomes favoring minority

interests, for example, does not necessarily mean that active representation did not occur. It

may have taken place but was unsuccessful. It may also be the case that active represen-

tation produces outcomes that are not easily observed or have impacted a particular policy

area by altering the terms of debate or discussion rather than producing immediate and

tangible effects. The present study seeks to build on earlier research, therefore, by looking

for bureaucratic attitudes consistent with active representation rather than seeking evi-

dence of policy outcomes in line with the interests of specific groups. Our focus, therefore,

is on assessing the potential for active representation.

In conducting this work, we examine the idea of a ‘‘minority representative role,’’

introduced into the representative bureaucracy literature by Selden (1997b). This concept

refers to the willingness of bureaucrats to see themselves as advocates for, or representa-

tives of, minority interests. Selden (1997b, 140) found that administrators who adhered to

that role were more likely than others to make decisions consistent with interests of the

minority community. Selden also demonstrated that while minority racial or ethnic status

was an important determinant of minority representative role adherence, nonminority

bureaucrats also often shared that role perception. Indeed, Selden (1997b) and Selden,

Brudney, and Kellough (1998) found that it was a bureaucrat’s adoption of the minority

representative role, rather than race or ethnicity itself, which directly produces the active

representation of minority interests.

In our research, we first examine the connection between the race of individual

bureaucrats and attitude congruence with African-American citizens and then explore

the link between such attitude congruence and the extent to which bureaucrats view

themselves as representatives of African-American interests. Evidence of these connections

allow for a fuller elaboration of the linkages between passive and active representation.

2 We wish to note, however, that passive representation is important for a number of reasons besides the fact that it

may lead to active representation. Krislov (1967, 58) has argued, for example, that a representative public bureaucracy

can help to ensure that divergent points of view are present in policy deliberations, can promote the legitimacy of

government action, can result in the presence of employees with diverse skills, and can give all groups within society

a sense that they have stake in the outcomes of government.

3 This is not to say that the links between social background, socialization experiences, and attitudes are the same

for all groups. For example, the link may be stronger for African-Americans than for women (Keiser et al. 2002).

Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory698

at P ennsylvania S

tate U niversity on M

ay 10, 2016 http://jpart.oxfordjournals.org/

D ow

nloaded from

REPRESENTATIVE BUREAUCRACY AND ACTIVE REPRESENTATION

In some of the earliest empirical work to explore the connection between passive and

active representation, Meier and Stewart (1992) and Meier (1993a) found that the presence

of minority public school teachers was positively associated with constructive educational

outcomes for minority students. Meier (1993a, 411) focused specifically on the ability of

Latino teachers to represent the interests of Latino students and found strong support for

the idea that passive representation did indeed lead to active representation.

In other work, Hindera (1993a, 1993b) examined the effects of the passive represen-

tation of African-Americans in Regional Offices of the Equal Employment Opportunity

Commission (EEOC) on the percentage of total charges filed on behalf of African-

American employees or applicants in those regions. Hindera (1993b) found that charges

benefiting African-Americans were filed more frequently as the percentage of African-

American investigators employed within the Regional Offices increased. A more recent

analysis of the EEOC, however, revealed that the introduction of new goals and priorities

led to a decline in the extent of active representation of African-Americans (Meier,

Pennington, and Eller 2005).

In her study of the US Department of Agriculture’s Farmers Home Administration,

Selden (1997b, 139) concluded that the passive representation of African-Americans,

Hispanics, and Asians positively influenced the allocation of loans favoring those groups

in the Farmers Home Administration’s Rural Housing Loans program. Selden (1997a, 36)

asserted that such findings are ‘‘particularly important because active representation is

found in an agency whose primary mission does not emphasize minority issues, that

historically has employed low percentages of minorities, and that has implemented

policies that have adversely affected minorities.’’

In addition, as noted earlier, Selden (1997b) also concluded that attitudes, beliefs, and

values lead, for some public administrators, to the formation of a ‘‘minority representative

role perception’’ that, in turn, leads to the formation of decisions consistent with minority

interests. Selden found that ‘‘administrators who perceive their role as that of an advocate

or representative of minority interests are more likely to make decisions that benefit the

minority community’’ (140). Selden further demonstrated that while minority racial status

was an important determinant of the minority representative role, non-minority bureaucrats

also often shared that role perception. In related work, Selden, Brudney, and Kellough

(1998, 717) reported that ‘‘race, education, age, party identification, years employed by the

federal government, and perceived work obligations’’ collectively affect the likelihood that

administrators will view themselves as representatives of minority concerns, and as was

observed previously, it is the adoption of the minority representative role, rather than race

or ethnicity itself, which explains the active representation of minority interests.

More recently, Wilkins and Keiser (2006) found evidence of the passive-active link in

child support enforcement for women. Similarly, Meier and Nicholson-Crotty (2006) found

that the percentage of women in local law enforcement is positively related to the number of

reports and arrests for sexual assault. Interestingly, however, Wilkins and Williams (2005)

concluded that a higher percentage of African-American police officers led to an increase in

racial profiling of African-American citizens. Thus, passive representation may affect policy

outcomes but not always in the expected direction (see Andrews et al. 2005; Pitts 2005).

In general, all the research finding evidence of active representation of minority

interests assumes the presence of minority administrator attitudes consistent with those

Bradbury and Kellough Representative Bureaucracy 699

at P ennsylvania S

tate U niversity on M

ay 10, 2016 http://jpart.oxfordjournals.org/

D ow

nloaded from

of minorities in the general population. But to date, only a relatively small number of

unique organizations have been examined, and the work is necessarily conducted within

specific, narrowly defined circumstances described above. It seems likely, however, that

active representation, in the sense of minority public administrators ‘‘press[ing] for the

interests and desires of those whom they are presumed to represent’’ (Mosher 1968, 12),

could be more common than current research suggests. An examination of the extent to

which minority administrators exhibit attitudes, values, or beliefs congruent with those of

minority citizens should help us to understand this possibility. Specifically, we shall be

interested in observing whether the attitudes, values, and beliefs of African-American

administrators are congruent with those of African-American citizens.

THE POTENTIAL FOR ACTIVE REPRESENTATION

As we have observed, theory suggests that administrative attitudes consistent with those of

minorities in the population and adherence to a minority representative role are important

and necessary preconditions for active representation by minority bureaucrats. Only a lim-

ited amount of work has examined bureaucratic values as a precursor to active represen-

tation, however, and much of that is now 30 years old. Given the fact that values may shift

over time, it is important that we continue to reexamine the degree to which key differences

between minority and nonminority public administrators are present on a range of salient

issues and whether congruence on those same issues exists between minority bureaucrats

and minority citizens.

In the 1970s, work by a few scholars documented a significant amount of attitude

congruence between minority public administrators and minorities in the population on

issues directly related to minority interests, and major differences of opinion were found

between minority and non-minority administrators. For example, Thompson (1976) found

substantial differences by race on support for affirmative action programs, with minority

group members, both in the population generally and among administrators, more sup-

portive than whites. Similarly, Thompson (1978, 342) concluded that while most social

characteristics of public personnel administrators were poor predictors of ‘‘how receptive

to hiring minorities a civil servant will be,’’ both minorities and women were significantly

more receptive to hiring minorities than non-minority men.

In other work, Rosenbloom and Kinnard (1977, 38) explored the attitudes of high-

ranking personnel at the Department of Defense on ‘‘the extent to which they felt a re-

sponsibility toward and sought to aid minority group members in obtaining placements

with the federal bureaucracy.’’ Again, significant attitude differences were found for dif-

ferent racial groups, with minority administrators being more supportive than nonminority

administrators, but attitudes were also influenced by such factors as age, seniority, educa-

tion, and position.

In another study, Rosenbloom and Featherstonhaugh (1977) directly compared

the attitudes of federal administrators and citizens on several measures of political

participation. They found that, regardless of organizational position, African-American

administrators held significantly different attitudes than white administrators, but when

compared to the attitudes of whites, African-American bureaucrats and African-

American citizens tended to hold similar views. Their analysis ‘‘strongly suggests

that passive bureaucratic representation can serve as a prerequisite for greater active

representation’’ (879).

Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory700

at P ennsylvania S

tate U niversity on M

ay 10, 2016 http://jpart.oxfordjournals.org/

D ow

nloaded from

More recently, Dolan (2002) found that women and men differed significantly in their

opinions regarding government spending priorities on a variety of social programs. These

differences were present between men and women in the general population and between

men and women in the federal Senior Executive Service (SES). In addition, the preferences

of SES women were consistent with those of women in the general population, suggesting

that organizational socialization had not eroded the potential for women in high-level

positions to act as representatives of women generally.

It would be useful to continue this line of inquiry. No studies on attitude congruence

have been conducted at the local level where, arguably, public officials interact more

closely with the people. In addition, the significance of individual attitudes and values

may, as mentioned earlier, derive from the fact that they lead some administrators to adopt

a minority representative role that makes them more likely than other public servants to

press for the interests of minority communities (Selden 1997a, 1997b; Selden, Brudney,

and Kellough 1998). This idea is consistent with Herbert’s (1974) argument that minority

administrators feel a sense of responsibility and pressure to adopt an administrative ori-

entation that serves minority communities. 4 It would be helpful, therefore, to also look for

the presence of the minority representative role as an indicator of the potential for active

representation in local government.

RESEARCH METHOD

Data on minority and nonminority attitudes were collected through a survey administered

separately to public administrators and citizens in Athens, GA, in the fall of 2002. Athens is

a medium-sized city in northeast Georgia with a population of slightly more than 100,000

people. It is the home of the University of Georgia and in many respects is similar to

numerous university or college towns. Administratively, the City of Athens and Clarke

County (A-CC) have a unified government offering a broad range of services typical of an

urban area of its size. African-Americans comprise approximately 30% of the population.

The survey was designed to solicit information that would permit a direct comparison

of attitudes between public administrators and the people they serve. The development of

survey questions was informed by, but do not replicate, questions used in previous studies

of the potential for active representation, notably Herbert (1974), Karnig and McClain

(1988), and Selden, Brudney, and Kellough (1998). The goal was to create a slate of survey

questions that address political conditions, specific policies, and administrative behaviors

that are directly related to the theory of representative bureaucracy and are salient to the

African-American community.

Citizens and administrators were asked to indicate their level of agreement with two

sets of 10 statements. 5 The first set of questions asked respondents to assess the quality of

the local government and how well the government has addressed issues related to the

African-American community. The second set of questions focused on the respondent’s

perceptions of the responsibility of individual administrators to represent the interests of

the African-American community and to ensure that those interests are considered in the

4 See Selden, Brewer, and Brudney (1999) for an analysis of various administrative role orientations.

5 Respondents were asked to indicate their level of agreement on a four-point scale: Completely Disagree,

Generally Disagree, Generally Agree, and Completely Agree.

Bradbury and Kellough Representative Bureaucracy 701

at P ennsylvania S

tate U niversity on M

ay 10, 2016 http://jpart.oxfordjournals.org/

D ow

nloaded from

policy process. Thus, these questions measure the perceived importance of the minority

representative role for public administrators. 6

In conducting the survey, African-American neighborhoods were oversampled to

ensure a sufficient number of African-American respondents to the citizen questionnaire.

One sample of 1,000 individuals was drawn at random from the entire population of

A-CC, and a second sample of 1,000 names was drawn at random from a single census

tract that was known to have a high proportion of African-Americans (70.7%). Four

rounds of direct mailings with replacement questionnaires were distributed. A number of

the addresses in the original sample proved to be invalid (primarily from among those

addresses in the heavily African-American tract), so the total sample was effectively

reduced to 893. Ultimately, 302 usable survey instruments were returned producing

a response rate of 33.8% which was respectable given the type of study being conducted. 7

Because of the oversampling of African-American citizens, 45% of our respondents to

the citizen survey identified themselves as African-American while 55% indicated they

were white.

The population of local government administrators was drawn from across all

departments and agencies of the local government but was focused on employees in

‘‘higher level’’ positions since they possess the necessary authority and discretion to

make significant administrative decisions and to provide a rigorous test of the theory

of representative bureaucracy. 8 The sample consisted of all 787 employees categorized

as officials and administrators, professionals, technicians, and protective service workers

in reports submitted to the EEOC by the government. 9 Completed and useable surveys

were received from 264 of these employees for a response rate of 33.5%. Again, this is

a respectable rate given the type of survey that was involved and the fact that the

respondents closely mirrored the population of administrators in the employment cate-

gories covered. Among our respondent administrators, 77.4% were white and additional

20.5% were African-American. Consequently, whites and African-Americans accounted

for 97.9% of the administrators under analysis. Meaningful comparisons of attitudes

among citizens and public administrators by race could, therefore, only be conducted

for those groups. Administrators from other racial categories were excluded from the

analysis. 10

Analysis of the survey data focuses on three specific research questions. First, to

what degree are the views of African-American and white citizens and African-American

and white administrators similar or different? For example, are the attitudes of African-

American citizens and administrators congruent? Second, are African-Americans in

6 To be consistent with earlier work, we have used the phrase ‘‘minority representative role’’ to describe the

phenomenon we are interested in observing, although the reader is reminded that we are actually measuring the extent

to which administrators believe they should represent the interests of African-Americans. Later, we describe this

concept as an African-American representative role perception. The survey instrument was pretested by a small sample

of administrators and local government specialists at the University of Georgia, Carl Vinson Institute of Government.

7 The reader should note that we are not attempting to generalize findings to the entire A-CC population.

8 By focusing on administrators in higher level positions, we are to a moderate extent also controlling for

administrator income and social/economic status.

9 The personnel information system listed 45 employees in these categories erroneously as a result of recent

retirements, transfers, or other personnel actions. Those 45 employees were not counted among the 787 in the sample.

10 We should note that African-Americans are the oldest and by far the largest minority group in A-CC. We excluded

22 administrators from other non-White categories including one Asian, three Hispanics, nine of mixed racial or ethnic

background, and nine from a racial or ethnic category described as ‘‘other.’’

Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory702

at P ennsylvania S

tate U niversity on M

ay 10, 2016 http://jpart.oxfordjournals.org/

D ow

nloaded from

government more likely than whites in government to adhere to a minority advocacy

role? And third, is attitude congruence with the African-American community a

primary determinant of adherence to an African-American advocacy role by public

administrators?

FINDINGS REGARDING ATTITUDE DIFFERENCES AND CONGRUENCE

Many important and interesting observations can be drawn from our survey. For exam-

ple, there are substantial differences in the attitudes of African-Americans and whites on

almost all the survey items, and those racial differences are present between citizens as

well as administrators. In table 1, showing responses by race to survey questions dealing

with the performance of the A-CC government, African-American and white citizens

have significantly different views on all issues except that reflected in item 2 which asks

if the A-CC government is ‘‘doing an excellent job of solving the county’s most impor-

tant problems.’’ On all other items, striking differences appear. For instance, approxi-

mately 76% of African-American citizens agreed that ‘‘African-Americans have fewer

opportunities than whites to get affordable housing in A-CC,’’ but only 28.4% of white

citizens held that view. On item 9, slightly more than 82% of African-American citizens

agreed that ‘‘African-Americans are treated less fairly than whites by A-CC law enforce-

ment,’’ whereas only 26.3% of white citizens agreed with that statement. Similar differ-

ences by race are found among the administrators surveyed. For example, 61.2% of

African-American administrators agreed that African-Americans are treated less fairly

than whites by law enforcement, but only 3.7% of white administrators agree with that

view.

Turing to a consideration of survey items 11 through 20 in table 2, we see even more

dramatic differences. It should be recalled that these questions were designed to assess

citizen and administrator attitudes regarding the extent to which local administrators

should adhere to a ‘‘minority representative role’’ by promoting the interests of the

African-American community. Substantial differences are found here between

African-American and white citizens and African-American and white administrators

on all items. For example, nearly 87% of the African-American citizens indicated that

‘‘High-ranking employees of the A-CC government should actively advocate in favor

of policies that specifically address the interests of African-American citizens,’’ but

only 42.5% of white citizens agreed with that statement. Among administrators, on that

same survey item, 86% of African-Americans agreed, but only 17.4% of the whites

agreed.

Tables 3 and 4 provide information on differences between citizens and administra-

tors within racial categories. Here, we see a considerable amount of consistency, as

expected, among African-Americans on most survey items. For instance, African-

American citizens and administrators have similar responses on 6 of the 10 items in table

3 and on 9 of the 10 items in table 4. This finding indicates clearly that African-American

administrators have views that reflect those of the African-American community on issues

that are salient to that community, as the theory of representative bureaucracy would

predict. In sharp contrast, there are statistically significant differences in the views of white

administrators and African-American citizens on all but items 1 and 2 in table 3 and on

every item in table 4, although indications of the statistical significance of these differences

are omitted from the tables for clarity.

Bradbury and Kellough Representative Bureaucracy 703

at P ennsylvania S

tate U niversity on M

ay 10, 2016 http://jpart.oxfordjournals.org/

D ow

nloaded from

Table 1 Citizen and Administrator Responses by Race: Percent Agreeing with Survey Items 1–10 (number of category respondents in parentheses)

Survey Items

Citizens Administrators

African-American White African-American White

1. Overall, I am satisfied with the quality of services

that A-CC government provides.

70.1** (134) 85.5 (166) 86.0 (50) 79.2 (192)

2. A-CC government is doing an excellent job

solving the county’s most important problems.

57.0 (135) 56.4 (165) 66.0 (50) 51.0 (192)

3. A-CC government should make every possible

effort to improve the social and economic

position of African-Americans.

95.5*** (134) 62.8 (164) 94.0*** (50) 42.1 (190)

4. A-CC government is more productive when its

workforce reflects the racial diversity of the

county.

83.2** (131) 67.7 (164) 88.0*** (50) 48.2 (191)

5. A-CC government should support programs that

reduce the barriers to employment, such as the

lack of affordable quality day care.

97.8*** (135) 74.8 (163) 90.0*** (50) 63.7 (190)

6. African-Americans have fewer opportunities

than whites to get affordable housing in A-CC.

76.3*** (135) 28.4 (162) 77.1*** (48) 12.3 (187)

7. Public facilities in A-CC meet the needs of the

African-American community.

51.1*** (135) 73.5 (155) 69.4*** (49) 91.8 (184)

8. African-Americans are treated less fairly than

whites by A-CC public transportation.

53.4*** (131) 12.7 (150) 29.2*** (48) 1.1 (183)

9. African-Americans are treated less fairly than

whites by A-CC law enforcement.

82.2*** (135) 26.3 (152) 61.2*** (49) 3.7 (187)

10. Race relations are a problem in A-CC. 78.5*** (135) 43.6 (165) 70.0*** (50) 34.2 (190)

Note: Two-tailed tests of the difference of proportions were conducted comparing African-American and white respondents within the citizen and administrator groups.

**Statistically significant differences at the .01 level.

***Statistically significant differences at the .001 level.

7 0 4

at Pennsylvania State University on May 10, 2016 http://jpart.oxfordjournals.org/ Downloaded from

Table 2 Citizen and Administrator Responses by Race: Percent Agreeing with Survey Items 11–20 (number of category respondents in parentheses)

Survey Items

Citizens Administrators

African-American White African-American White

11. High-ranking employees of A-CC government should make special efforts to provide

information to policy makers concerning the needs and perspectives of the African-

American community.

92.6*** (136) 63.6 (162) 92.0*** (50) 37.7 (191)

12. High-ranking employees of A-CC government should actively advocate in favor

of policies that specifically address the interests of African-American citizens.

86.8*** (136) 42.5 (160) 86.0*** (50) 17.4 (190)

13. High-ranking employees of A-CC government should actively advocate in favor

of a more equitable distribution of services to African-Americans.

91.9*** (136) 55.1 (158) 96.0*** (50) 29.8 (188)

14. High-ranking employees of A-CC government should actively advocate for

organizational change to ensure responsiveness to African-American interests.

94.1*** (135) 47.2 (159) 96.0*** (50) 28.9 (190)

15. High-ranking employees of A-CC government should make special efforts to identify

African-Americans in their organization and support them with opportunities and

positive feedback.

92.6*** (135) 52.8 (159) 87.8*** (49) 35.1 (191)

16. High-ranking employees of A-CC government should encourage and recruit qualified

African-Americans for employment in A-CC government.

97.8*** (136) 77.8 (162) 94.0*** (50) 62.6 (190)

17. High-ranking employees of A-CC government should actively work to enhance the

access of African-American citizens to government decision makers, such as elected

officials and department heads.

93.4*** (136) 63.6 (162) 98.0*** (50) 42.6 (188)

18. High-ranking employees of A-CC government should actively advocate for increased

participation of the African-American community in the shaping of policy for A-CC.

95.6*** (136) 65.8 (161) 94.0*** (50) 44.0 (191)

19. High-ranking employees of A-CC government should seek out qualified

African-American citizens who can be recommended to sit on boards and commissions.

94.1*** (136) 72.2 (162) 94.0*** (50) 47.6 (191)

20. High-ranking employees of A-CC government should sensitize others to stereotypes

about race.

87.9*** (132) 65.6 (160) 95.9*** (49) 74.2 (190)

Note: Two-tailed tests of the difference of proportions were conducted comparing African-American and white respondents within the citizen and administrator groups.

***Statistically significant differences at the .001 level.

7 0 5

at Pennsylvania State University on May 10, 2016 http://jpart.oxfordjournals.org/ Downloaded from

Table 3 African-American and white Responses by Citizen and Administrator: Percent Agreeing with Survey Items 1–10 (number of category respondents in parentheses)

Survey Items

African-Americans Whites

Citizens Administrators Citizens Administrators

1. Overall, I am satisfied with the quality of services that

A-CC government provides.

70.1* (134) 86.0 (50) 85.5 (166) 79.2 (192)

2. A-CC government is doing an excellent job solving the

county’s most important problems.

57.0 (135) 66.0 (50) 56.4 (165) 51.0 (192)

3. A-CC government should make every possible effort to

improve the social and economic position of African-

Americans.

95.5 (134) 94.0 (50) 62.8*** (164) 42.1 (190)

4. A-CC government is more productive when its workforce

reflects the racial diversity of the county.

83.2 (131) 88.0 (50) 67.7*** (164) 48.2 (191)

5. A-CC government should support programs that reduce the

barriers to employment, such as the lack of affordable

quality day care.

97.8 (135) 90.0 (50) 74.8** (163) 63.7 (190)

6. African-Americans have fewer opportunities than whites to

get affordable housing in A-CC.

76.3 (135) 77.1 (48) 28.4*** (162) 12.3 (187)

7. Public facilities in A-CC meet the

needs of the African-American community.

51.1* (135) 69.4 (49) 73.5*** (155) 91.8 (184)

8. African-Americans are treated less

fairly than whites by A-CC public transportation.

53.4** (131) 29.2 (48) 12.7*** (150) 1.1 (183)

9. African-Americans are treated less fairly than whites by

A-CC law enforcement.

82.2** (135) 61.2 (49) 26.3*** (152) 3.7 (187)

10. Race relations are a problem in A-CC. 78.5 (135) 70.0 (50) 43.6 (165) 34.2 (190)

Note: Two-tailed tests of the difference of proportions were conducted comparing citizen and administrator responses within racial groups.

*Statistically significant differences at the .05 level.

**Statistically significant differences at the .01 level.

***Statistically significant differences at the .001 level.

7 0 6

at Pennsylvania State University on May 10, 2016 http://jpart.oxfordjournals.org/ Downloaded from

Table 4 African-American and White Responses by Citizen and Administrator: Percent Agreeing with Survey items 11–20 (number of category respondents in parentheses)

Survey Items

African-Americans Whites

Citizens Administrators Citizens Administrators

11. High-ranking employees of A-CC government should make special efforts to provide

information to policy makers concerning the needs and perspectives of the African-

American community.

92.6 (136) 92.0 (50) 63.6*** (162) 37.7 (191)

12. High-ranking employees of A-CC government should actively advocate in favor of

policies that specifically address the interests of African-American citizens.

86.8 (136) 86.0 (50) 42.5*** (160) 17.4 (190)

13. High-ranking employees of A-CC government should actively advocate in favor

of a more equitable distribution of services to African-Americans.

91.9 (136) 96.0 (50) 55.1*** (158) 29.8 (188)

14. High-ranking employees of A-CC government should actively advocate for

organizational change to ensure responsiveness to African-American interests.

94.1 (135) 96.0 (50) 47.2*** (159) 28.9 (190)

15. High-ranking employees of A-CC government should make special efforts to identify

African-Americans in their organization and support them with opportunities and

positive feedback.

92.6 (135) 87.8 (49) 52.8*** (159) 35.1 (191)

16. High-ranking employees of A-CC government should encourage and recruit qualified

African-Americans for employment in A-CC government.

97.8 (136) 94.0 (50) 77.8* (162) 62.6 (190)

17. High-ranking employees of A-CC government should actively work to enhance the

access of African-American citizens to government decision makers, such as elected

officials and department heads.

93.4 (136) 98.0 (50) 63.6*** (162) 42.6 (188)

18. High-ranking employees of A-CC government should actively advocate for increased

participation of the African-American community in the shaping of policy for A-CC.

95.6 (136) 94.0 (50) 65.8*** (161) 44.0 (191)

19. High-ranking employees of A-CC government should seek out qualified

African-American citizens who can be recommended to sit on boards and commissions.

94.1 (136) 94.0 (50) 72.2*** (162) 47.6 (191)

20. High-ranking employees of A-CC government should sensitize others to stereotypes

about race.

87.9* (132) 95.9 (49) 65.6 (160) 74.2 (190)

Note: Two-tailed tests of the difference of proportions were conducted comparing African-American and white respondents within the citizen and administrator groups.

*Statistically significant differences at the .05 level.

***Statistically significant differences at the .001 level.

7 0 7

at Pennsylvania State University on May 10, 2016 http://jpart.oxfordjournals.org/ Downloaded from

The final comparison that is reported directly in tables 3 and 4 is that between white

citizens and white administrators. Here we see remarkable differences of views. In fact,

white citizens have views that are significantly different from those of white administrators

on 16 of the 20 items from the survey. This response pattern is intriguing because it reveals

that the views of white citizens in this community are more in line with those of African-

American citizens than with those of white administrators. In fact, the suggestion is that the

views of white administrators are, in this case, out of touch with those of the citizenry in

general. The dynamic underlying this pattern is uncertain at this point, and it would be very

interesting, of course, to see if this pattern would emerge in studies of other communities or

in studies that address other issues. In summary, however, and in direct relevance to the

theory of representative bureaucracy, our survey responses show significant congruence in

the attitudes of African-American citizens and administrators and major differences in the

views of white administrators and African-American citizens.

EXPLAINING ATTITUDE CONGRUENCE BETWEEN ADMINISTRATORS AND AFRICAN-AMERICAN CITIZENS

We turn now to a consideration of factors that may influence the extent to which admin-

istrators’ attitudes are congruent with those of African-American citizens. Obviously, race

may be a primary determinant since we have already seen that African-American admin-

istrators have attitudes largely consistent with those of African-American citizens, whereas

white administrators do not. That does not mean, however, that no white administrators

will exhibit attitudes similar to those of the African-American citizenry. A number of

factors besides race may determine administrator’s attitudes including sex, age, education,

political ideology, and awareness of views within the African-American community. To

examine that possibility, we estimate a regression equation in which administrator attitude

congruence with African-American citizens is seen as a function of an administrator’s race

as well as the additional variables noted.

Our measure of administrator attitude congruence with African-American citizens,

our dependent variable in this model, is constructed by first calculating for

each administrator the proportion of African-American citizens who register the same

response as that administrator on each of the 20 survey items presented in tables 1

through 4. 11

Then, also for each administrator, we calculate the arithmetic mean of those

proportions across the 20 items. This procedure gives us a measure of the average extent

to which an administrator’s responses are congruent with those of the African-American

citizens. An example may help to clarify how this is done. We may find, for instance, that

an individual administrator agreed with survey item 1, and 70% of the African-American

citizens also agreed with that item. If so, we would conclude that this administrator’s

response to item 1 is congruent with 70% of the African-American citizenry. If that same

administrator disagreed with item 2, and only 20% of the African-American citizens

disagreed, then the administrator’s response on item 2 would be congruent with 20% of

the African-American citizen respondents. Similar measures of congruence are made on

11 For purposes of this calculation, original response categories of ‘‘Completely Agree’’ and ‘‘Generally Agree’’

were combined into one category labeled ‘‘Agree,’’ and the response categories ‘‘Completely Disagree’’ and ‘‘Generally

Disagree’’ were combined into a single category labeled ‘‘Disagree.’’

Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory708

at P ennsylvania S

tate U niversity on M

ay 10, 2016 http://jpart.oxfordjournals.org/

D ow

nloaded from

the remaining 18 items, and the average (mean) level of congruence across all 20 items is

then calculated to serve as our summary measure. The higher the mean level of congru-

ence on the survey items, the greater the level of consistency observed between an

individual administrator’s attitudes and those of the African-American community.

For individual administrators, the mean level of attitude congruence ranged from

16.52% to 83.60%, meaning that one administrator at the bottom of the range agreed

on average with only 16.52% of the African-American citizens whereas the administrator

at the top of the range on this variable agree with 83.60% of the African-American

citizens on average. 12

Independent variables are drawn from a series of survey questions related to demo-

graphic characteristics of citizens and administrators. 13

The race of the administrators

surveyed is a variable of primary interest, as noted above, since our earlier results indicate

that African-American administrators are more likely than white administrators to have

attitudes congruent with those of African-American citizens. Administrator race is coded

0 for white and 1 for African-American; thus, a positive coefficient on race is expected.

Administrator sex (coded 0 for male and 1 for female) is included as a control variable

since early research has shown that women may be more sympathetic to issues associated

with representative bureaucracy than men. For example, Thompson (1978, 335) concluded

that, male administrators were ‘‘significantly less receptive to recruiting nonwhites’’ than

were female administrators. Administrator age is also entered into the model as a control

for generational differences in attitudes and is expected to be negatively associated with

attitude congruence with the African-American community. On the other hand, higher

levels of education achieved by administrators are expected to be positively associated

congruence with African-American citizen attitudes. We expect also that the political

ideology of individual administrators is important. More liberal administrators are ex-

pected to have higher levels of congruence with the views of the African-American com-

munity, once other variables are held constant. 14 Finally, A-CC administrators were asked

to indicate the amount of feedback on important issues they receive from the African-

American community in order to gauge their familiarity with such issues. 15

Responses

were measured on a four-point scale: 1 for none at all, 2 for not very much, 3 for

fair amount, and 4 for great deal. A positive association is expected between the

amount of feedback from the African-American community received on salient issues

12 Across all administrators, this summary measure of attitude congruence with the African-American citizenry

itself had a mean 50.71, a median of 48.55, and a standard deviation of 21.84. For African-American administrators, the

mean of the measure was 76.29, indicating that, on average, African-American administrators agreed with 76.29% of

the African-American citizens responding to our survey. For white administrators, the mean of the summary measure

was 44.58, indicating that, on average, white administrators agreed with only 44.58% of our African-American citizen

respondents. Although this measure is not a simple summation of individual administrator’s responses to survey

items 1–20, Cronbach’s alpha for those items is .915.

13 Colinearity statistics including variance inflation factors revealed no evidence of multicolinearity problems in this

or subsequent models. Variance inflation factors in the models tested ranged from 1.03 to 1.85.

14 Political ideology is coded as 1 5 Very Liberal, 2 5 Liberal, 3 5 Moderate, 4 5 Conservative, and 5 5 Very

Conservative. Given that coding system, political ideology is expected to be negatively associated with attitude

congruence with the African-American citizens who responded to our survey.

15 The feedback variable measures the amount of direct interaction between an individual administrator and the

African-American public. As such, this variable helps to capture the extent to which administrators are knowledgeable

of concerns of the African-American citizenry.

Bradbury and Kellough Representative Bureaucracy 709

at P ennsylvania S

tate U niversity on M

ay 10, 2016 http://jpart.oxfordjournals.org/

D ow

nloaded from

by administrators (and thus, awareness of African-American citizen opinions) and attitude

congruence with African-American citizens.

Results from this regression, estimated using ordinary least squares, are presented in

the first column in table 5. As can be seen, five of the six independent variables have

a significant effect on the extent to which administrator attitudes on survey items examined

are congruent with the views of African-American citizens in A-CC. Race, sex, education,

political ideology, and the receipt of feedback from the African-American community are

all associated with administrator attitude congruence with African-American citizens as

expected. Race clearly has a very large effect with African-American administrators on

average registering a level of congruence more than 25% points higher than that of white

administrators. The age of the administrator apparently has no effect on congruence,

contrary to our expectation. Overall, the model explains slightly more than 46% of the

variance in the dependent variable.

ADMINISTRATOR ADHERENCE TO AN AFRICAN-AMERICAN REPRESENTATIVE ROLE

As was noted earlier, agreement with survey items 11 through 20 (see tables 2 and 4)

provides an indication of the degree to which an administrator has views consistent with

the adoption of an African-American representative role. A regression model was devel-

oped to predict and to better understand the impact of race and other variables on adherence

to that role perception.

The dependent variable in this model is an index that represents the extent to which

administrators agree that they should exhibit behaviors that are consistent with active

representation, and thus the minority, or in our case, African-American representative role.

It should be recalled that responses to survey items 11 though 20 were measured on a four-

point scale where 1 equals completely disagree, 2 equals generally disagree, 3 equals

generally agree, and 4 equals completely agree. The average (mean) response on those

questions was calculated for each administrator, providing a measure of the extent to which

Table 5 Models Predicting Administrator Attitude Congruence with African-American Citizens and African- American Representative Role Adoption (unstandardized coefficients, SEs in parentheses)

Attitude Congruence with African-American

Citizens

African-American Representative Role Adoption: Model 1

African-American Representative Role Adoption: Model 2

Race 25.602 (2.786)*** .877 (.107)*** .067 (.072)

Sex 7.183 (2.266)*** .168 (.087) �.059 (.051) Age 1.706 (1.549) .110 (.060) .056 (.034)

Education 3.393 (1.185)** .134 (.046)** .027 (.026)

Ideology �4.870 (1.304)*** �.174 (.050)*** �.020 (.029) Feedback from

African-American

community 2.281 (1.162)* .072 (.045) .000 (.026)

Attitude congruence .032 (.001)***

R 2 5 .461 N 5 229 R

2 5 .399 N 5 229 R

2 5 .806 N 5 229

*p , .05; **p , .01; ***p , .001.

Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory710

at P ennsylvania S

tate U niversity on M

ay 10, 2016 http://jpart.oxfordjournals.org/

D ow

nloaded from

the administrator had adopted the African-American representative role. 16 The independent

variables, race, sex, education, and feedback, were expected to have a positive relationship

with adherence to an African-American representative role perception by administrators,

whereas age and ideology were expected to have negative coefficients.

Regression results are presented in the second column in table 5. As can be seen, race

has a strong positive effect on adoption of the African-American representative role, in-

dicating that African-American administrators have a much stronger propensity to adopt

that role than do white administrators. However, education and political ideology are also

significantly related to adoption of this role as expected. Administrators with higher levels

of education are more likely to see the African-American representative role as important,

whereas those who identify themselves as politically conservative are less likely to embrace

that role. Notably, sex and age are only marginally significant by usual standards, with

probability levels of .055 and .067, respectively. Overall, the model explains approximately

40% of the variance in African-American representative role adoption by administrators.

At this point, it is clear that an administrator’s race impacts both attitude congruence

with African-American citizens and the adoption of an African-American representative

role. Other research has demonstrated that adherence to a minority representative role is, in

turn, a primary determinant of active representation (Selden, Brudney, and Kellough 1998).

Further insight into the potential for active representation would be provided by under-

standing the relative effects of race and attitude congruence on minority (i.e., African-

American) representative role adoption. This is an intriguing question, in part because

attitude congruence, being partially a function of race, will likely predate a public admin-

istrator’s career and possible adoption of the minority representative role. As a result, it

may typically be the case that active representation of minority interests occurs when race

leads to attitude congruence with the minority community and that congruence in turn

leads to adoption of the minority representative role. 17

Thus, it is hypothesized that when

administrators, regardless of race and other demographic variables, hold attitudes in

common with African-American citizens, they will be more likely to adopt an African-

American representative role orientation.

The results from a regression model designed to test this hypothesis are presented in

the third column of table 5. These results show that, as expected, attitude congruence with

the African-American community is the predominant predictor of advocacy role adoption.

16 Cronbach’s alpha for this measure is .956. Two administrators did not respond to this battery of questions and

were excluded from this analysis and earlier analyses.

17 Because race is an intrinsic characteristic at birth, it predates the formation of attitudes, including attitudes

congruent with African-American citizens in general. We believe that race influences socialization processes that, in

turn, influence the formation of a broad array of attitudes as the theory of representative bureaucracy suggests. To the

extent that this process operates as assumed, an administrator’s attitude congruence with African-American citizens

will most likely predate adoption of an African-American representative role perception by that administrator. It is

unlikely that an administrator will first adopt an African-American representative role and then formulate attitudes on

policy issues congruent with the attitudes of African-American citizens. In other words, the direction of causality is

expected to go from race to attitude formation to adoption of an African-American representative role, and our model is

based on that assumption. An administrator who feels a calling to serve the needs of the African-American community

must first have some understanding and appreciation of the challenges facing that community and must have attitudes

that lead to the conclusion that those challenges warrant the dedicated efforts of public administrators. Thus, attitude

congruence serves as a roadmap for the pressing for interests and desires that is the hallmark of bureaucratic advocacy

(Mosher 1968). Although we cannot empirically test these causal assumptions given the cross-sectional nature of our

data, it appears implausible that African-American representative role adoption would occur before the formation of the

attitudes we measure.

Bradbury and Kellough Representative Bureaucracy 711

at P ennsylvania S

tate U niversity on M

ay 10, 2016 http://jpart.oxfordjournals.org/

D ow

nloaded from

In fact, attitude congruence is the only variable in the equation that achieves statistical

significance, and it does so at the .001 level. 18

In addition, the model explains 80% of the

variance of the dependent variable, suggesting that it is attitude congruence with the

African-American community, rather than race, per se, or any other demographic charac-

teristic, which appears to be the most important direct influence on administrator adoption

of an African-American representative role. When attitude congruence is held constant,

race has no effect on African-American representative role adoption, although race was

significant in our earlier model. This finding is consistent with our expectation that attitude

congruence with African-American citizens intervenes between race and adoption by

administrators of the African-American representative role.

CONCLUSION

A number of interesting findings are produced by this study. First, our initial analysis of

survey responses indicated that African-American citizens and African-American admin-

istrators exhibit very similar attitudes on the issues addressed in our survey. This finding is

consistent with what would be predicted by the theory of representative bureaucracy, and

as such, it may not be surprising. However, the pattern of attitude congruence is unmistak-

able and is, in fact, striking on questions related to the African-American representative

role perception (items 11–20). In addition, an equally compelling pattern suggests that

African-American citizens and white administrators hold markedly different attitudes.

The attitude congruence regression model explained a relatively large percent of the

variance in the extent to which administrators share the views of African-American citi-

zens. Race, as expected, proved to be a powerful predictor for attitude congruence. It is also

true, however, that sex, education, political ideology, and feedback from the African-

American community are important predictors of administrator congruence with the atti-

tudes of African-American citizens. Collectively, these results confirm those found by

researchers such as Rosenbloom and Featherstonhaugh (1977, 879) and support their

finding that ‘‘passive bureaucratic representation can serve as a prerequisite for greater

active representation.’’

The results of this study also support and expand upon the findings of previous

research on the minority representative role (see Selden 1997b; Selden, Brudney, and

Kellough 1998). Specifically, we find that African-American administrators are more

likely than white administrators to adopt an African-American representative role, but

more importantly, the inclusion of attitude congruence in the analysis overwhelmed all

other predictors of role adoption, including race. This result underscores the importance of

attitude congruence and helps to expand our understanding of the adoption of the minority

representative role and the potential for active representation.

As with all research on bureaucratic attitudes and behavior, this research has limi-

tations. First, only white and African-American citizen and administrator attitudes were

examined. Further research is needed to determine whether the observed patterns of

attitude congruence hold true for other racial and ethnic groups. Second, the survey was

18 The correlation between race and congruence with the attitudes of African-American citizens in our sample is .59,

indicating that while race is significantly associated with our measure of congruence with African-American citizen

attitudes, the correlation is not perfect. Variance inflation factors for race and attitude congruence were 1.55 and 1.85,

respectively, and for all other variables in this model, VIFs ranged from 1.04 to 1.22.

Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory712

at P ennsylvania S

tate U niversity on M

ay 10, 2016 http://jpart.oxfordjournals.org/

D ow

nloaded from

administered in only one local government context. Obviously, idiosyncratic factors

stemming from history, culture, and socioeconomic circumstances of that location may

have affected the attitudes of residents and administrators surveyed. Third, the survey

items in this research differ somewhat from those used in previous studies in terms of

the range of issues included. Future researchers should test different constructs to assess

whether the relationships observed here between race, attitude congruence, and represen-

tative role adoption will hold. In addition, the cross-sectional nature of our data prevents

a direct empirical test of the causal relationship between administrator attitude congruence

with African-American citizens and adoption of an African-American representative role.

Future work with data that separate these concepts in time would be useful to confirm the

direction of causality. Nevertheless, the attitudinal patterns observed here are consistent

with previous studies of the potential for active representation and therefore provide a solid

foundation for the further exploration of the adoption of a minority representative role.

Overall, this research presents a compelling argument that the potential for active

representation may be substantial within the higher level bureaucratic ranks of local

government. The data support the critical assumption underlying the concept of represen-

tative bureaucracy that race and other demographic characteristics are related to the atti-

tudes held by both citizens and public administrators. The findings here suggest that

demographic backgrounds and socialization experiences significantly influence attitudes

regarding the desirability of a government workforce that seeks to represent the prefer-

ences of a historically disadvantaged group. Additionally, the findings underscore the

importance of attitude congruence by suggesting that the impact of race on the adoption

of the African-American representative role by administrators operates through the for-

mation of attitudes consistent with those of African-American citizens. Given the impor-

tance of attitude congruence in determining the potential for active representation, future

work examining its determinants in other contexts should be productive.

REFERENCES

Andrews, Rhys, George A. Boyne, Kenneth J. Meier, Laurence J. O’Toole, and Richard M. Walker.

2005. Representative bureaucracy, organizational strategy, and public service performance: An

empirical analysis of English local government. Journal of Public Administration Research and

Theory 15:489–504.

Dolan, Julie A. 2000. The senior executive service: Gender, attitudes, and representative bureaucracy.

Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 10:513–29.

———. 2002. Representative bureaucracy in the federal executive: Gender and spending priorities.

Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 12:353–75.

Herbert, Adam W. 1974. The minority administrator: Problems, prospects, and challenges. Public

Administration Review 34:556–63.

Hindera, John J. 1993a. Representative bureaucracy: Further evidence of active representation in EEOC

district offices. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 3:415–29.

———. 1993b. Representative bureaucracy: Imprimis evidence of active representation in EEOC

district offices. Social Science Quarterly 74:95–108.

Karnig, Albert K., and Paula D. McClain. 1988. Minority administrators: Lessons from practice. In

Urban minority administrators: Politics, policy, and style, ed. A. K. Karnig and P. D. McClain,

143–54. Westport, CT: Greenwood.

Keiser, Lael R., Vicky M. Wilkins, Kenneth J. Meier, and Catherine A. Holland. 2002. Lipstick and

logarithms: Gender, institutional context, and representative bureaucracy. American Political

Science Review 96:553–64.

Bradbury and Kellough Representative Bureaucracy 713

at P ennsylvania S

tate U niversity on M

ay 10, 2016 http://jpart.oxfordjournals.org/

D ow

nloaded from

Krislov, Samuel. 1967. The Negro in federal employment. Minneapolis, MN: Univ. of Minnesota.

Krislov, Samuel, and David H. Rosenbloom. 1981. Representative bureaucracy and the American

political system. New York, NY: Praeger.

Meier, Kenneth J. 1993a. Latinos and representative bureaucracy: Testing the Thompson and

Henderson hypotheses. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 3:393–414.

———. 1993b. Representative bureaucracy: A theoretical and empirical exposition. Research in Public

Administration 2:1–35.

Meier, Kenneth J., and Jill Nicholson-Crotty. 2006. Gender, representative bureaucracy, and law

enforcement: The case of sexual assault. Public Administration Review 66:850–60.

Meier, Kenneth J., and Joseph J. Stewart, Jr. 1992. The impact of representative bureaucracies:

Educational systems and public policies. American Review of Public Administration 22:

157–71.

Meier, Kenneth J., Michael S. Pennington, and Warren S. Eller. 2005. Race, sex, and Clarence Thomas:

Representation change in the EEOC. Public Administration Review 65:171–79.

Mosher, Frederick. 1968. Democracy and the public service. New York, NY: Oxford Univ. Press.

Pitts, David W. 2005. Diversity, representation, and performance: Evidence about race and ethnicity in

public organizations. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 15:615–31.

Rosenbloom, David H., and Douglas Kinnard. 1977. Bureaucratic representation and bureaucratic

behavior: An exploratory analysis. Midwest Review of Public Administration 11:35–42.

Rosenbloom, David H., and Jeannette Featherstonhaugh. 1977. Passive and active representation in the

federal service: A comparison of blacks and whites. Social Science Quarterly 57:873–82.

Saltzstein, Grace H. 1979. Representative bureaucracy and bureaucratic responsibility: Problems and

prospects. Administration and Society 10:464–75.

Selden, Sally Coleman. 1997a. Representative bureaucracy: Examining the linkage between passive and

active representation in the Farmers Home Administration. American Review of Public

Administration 27:22–42.

———. 1997b. The promise of representative bureaucracy: Diversity and responsiveness in

a government agency. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.

Selden, Sally Coleman, Gene A. Brewer, and Jeffrey L. Brudney. 1999. Reconciling competing values in

public administration: Understanding the administrative role concept. Administration and Society

31:171–204.

Selden, Sally Coleman, Jeffrey L. Brudney, and J. Edward Kellough. 1998. Bureaucracy as

a representative institution: Toward a reconciliation of bureaucratic government and democratic

theory. American Journal of Political Science 42:717–44.

Thompson, Frank J. 1976. Minority groups in public bureaucracies: Are passive and active

representation linked? Administration and Society 8:201–26.

———. 1978. Civil servants and the deprived: Socio-political and occupational explanations of attitudes

toward minority hiring. American Journal of Political Science 22:325–47.

Wilkins, Vicky M., and Brian N. Williams. 2005. Black or blue: Racial profiling and representative

bureaucracy. Paper presented at the 8th Public Management Research Conference, Los Angeles,

CA, September 29–October 2.

Wilkins, Vicky M., and Lael R. Keiser. 2006. Linking passive and active representation by gender:

The case of child support agencies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory

16:87–102.

Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory714

at P ennsylvania S

tate U niversity on M

ay 10, 2016 http://jpart.oxfordjournals.org/

D ow

nloaded from