Socializing employees into organizational culture is crucial for both individual and organizational performance (Barnard, 1938; Desmond, 2006; Diiulio, 1994; Kaufman, 2006; Rainey & Steinbauer, 1999; Selznick, 1948; Wilson, 2000). This may be particularly salient for public organizations which have missions, objectives, and goals that concern society and transcend the bottom-line of private firms, and that they can leverage on for socialization purposes. An assumption seems to be that socialization into organizational culture is achieved through the direct communication of organizational mission, objectives and goals, and performance expectations. Yet there is little evidence on if this values-based socialization is a primary channel through which civil servants are socialized into organizational culture. Alternative channels of socialization warrant investigation especially in challenging contexts where patronage, nepotism, and corruption are norms and other-regarding values are exceptions (Grindle, 1997; McDonnell, 2017).

Using an original survey data including a vignette experiment from Nigeria’s and Ghana's civil services, this study investigates task-based socialization as a primary, alternative channel for socializing newly recruited civil servants into organizational culture. Existing studies in public administration show the importance of socialization into organizational mission or performance-based culture for organizational performance in both developed and developing countries and the influence of both formal and informal sources including training, managers and co-workers on recruits’ socialization (Blau, 1960; Buchanan, 1974; Chatman, 1991; Diiulio, 1994; Kaufman, 2006; Oberfield, 2012, 2014; Oberfield, 2010; Van Maanen, 1975; Wilson, 2000). Their assumption is that the direct communication of organizational mission, objectives and goals, and performance expectations—i.e., what I will refer to in this research as values-based socialization—is what inducts employees into organizational culture. Yet there is little evidence on how employee socialization into organizational culture is actually carried out, and what the role of one’s line manager is in this process. On the other hand, there are both theoretical reasons and evidence to suggest that tasks might be an important channel of socialization (Maynard-Moody & Musheno, 2003; Rainey & Steinbauer, 1999; Van Maanen, 1978). Therefore, building upon the extant literature on organizational socialization and a prior qualitative study conducted by me in Ghana and Nigeria, this study investigates the prevalence and effects of task-based socialization alongside values-based socialization in Nigeria’s and Ghana's civil services. Its hypotheses are:

• H1: Line managers focus on task-based socialization (i.e., role and task assignments, guidance, and feedback) more than on values-based socialization (i.e., the direct communication of organizational mission, objectives and goals, and performance expectations) of recruits.

• H2: Task-based socialization of recruits is positively associated with (influences) recruits' job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and early career advancement.

• H3: Values-based socialization of recruits is positively associated with (influences) recruits' job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and early career advancement.

I find that supervisors focused on task-based socialization of recruits but not values-based socialization, and task-based socialization influenced recruits’ work attitudes and early career advancements. Supervisors primarily socialized recruits by assigning tasks and providing guidance and feedback rather than directly communicating organizational mission, objectives and goals, and performance expectations. Task-based socialization by supervisors in recruits’ first year influenced recruits’ current levels of job satisfaction, and formal and informal early career advancements. On the other hand, I also find tentative evidence that task- and values-based socialization may influence different recruits’ outcomes.

I rolled out an original survey with a battery of innovative measures for supervisory socialization practices to new recruits into Nigeria’s and Ghana's civil services. In collaboration with the office of the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation (OHCSF) and AIG-Imoukhuede Foundation in Nigeria, I rolled out the survey to all recruits since 2018 into the OHCSF, the Federal Ministry of Education, the Federal Ministry of Health, and the Federal Ministry of Labour and Employment. In collaboration with the Office of the Head of Civil Service (OHCS) and International Growth Centre (IGC) in Ghana, I rolled out the survey to all new recruits into its core civil service in 2020-22. The survey included the novel measures of managerial socialization practices that adapted Bloom and Van Raneen (BVR)’s methodology of measuring managerial practices into the socialization context and a vignette experiment (Bloom et al., 2014; Bloom & Van Reenen, 2007, 2010). The vignette experiment enables me to improve on correlational analyses and tease out potential causal relations between managerial socialization practices and recruits' outcomes.

By introducing the idea that a great deal of organizational socialization can occur through mundane task-based socialization by managers, this study builds upon and the existing literature on organizational culture and socialization in public administration. It builds upon previous studies that demonstrate the importance of values-based socialization into organizational culture for organizational performance (Desmond, 2006; Diiulio, 1994; Grindle, 1997; Kaufman, 2006; McDonnell, 2017; Rainey & Steinbauer, 1999; Wilson, 2000). It complements them by showing that mundane and informal task-based socialization is an alternative socialization route which can also influence employees. It thus demonstrates that public organizations can still influence individual performance even in challenging contexts through task-based socialization. It also extends prior studies that demonstrate the importance of managers for recruit socialization by investigating the effects of specific, informal socialization practices by managers around tasks (Blau, 1960; Buchanan, 1974; Chatman, 1991; Oberfield, 2012, 2014; Oberfield, 2010; Riccucci et al., 2004; Sandfort, 2000). Finally, to the author’s knowledge, this is the first socialization study to use both the BVR-adapted measures and a survey experiment. The direction for future research includes investigating the influence of task- and values-based socialization on additional recruits’ outcomes, validating this study’s findings using field experiments and panel data in different contexts, and exploring why supervisors allocate positive and negative socialization experiences across recruits.

Findings have implications for both recruit orientation and the training and management of their supervisors. Supervisors should be equipped, facilitated, and rewarded to execute their task assignments, guidance, and feedback in an effective and meritocratic manner. Civil service training centres can offer management training on best practices in task assignments, guidance and feedback. Supervisors should be provided with guidelines and appropriate information by HR departments concerning recruits. Finally, how supervisors are integrating recruits into their teams should be monitored and integrated into their formal performance appraisal. Similarly, recruit orientation should focus not just on ``dos and don'ts'' but also on soft skills in personal and relationship management.

Innovations have never been as important for the competitiveness of organizations as they are in the 21st century (Qingrui et al., 2007; Micheli et al. 2012). Given the importance of the public sector to the economy, there is a growing management interest in how to foster innovation in the public sector for becoming a critical factor in addressing complex societal challenges and improving service delivery (De Vries et al., 2016; Torfing/Ansell, 2017).

Although there are some success stories, the introduction of innovation in the public sector has often failed (Davis et al., 2010). Unlike their private sector counterparts, public sector organizations often operate within a complex regulatory environment, with limited financial resources, and diverse stakeholder expectations (Rivera et al., 2012) where overly ambitious project planning, changing political requirements (Mulgan/Albury, 2003) and high-risk aversion are repeatedly cited as reasons for the failure of creating and sustainable implementation of innovations for administrative modernization (Chesbrough, 2004). Therefore, driving innovation within the public sector poses unique challenges (OECD, 2017).

To address these challenges, public fundings were introduced to foster public sector innovation (Daglio et al., 2014), from encouraging and influencing the ability of public organizations to support innovation throughout its life cycle, find ideas, and replicate results at scale (OECD, 2017). Previously, authors have highlighted that the effectiveness of public subsidies can be influenced by both internal and external contextual factors (Albors/Rodriguez Barrera, 2011). However, it is not clear whether funding affects innovation performance, or whether high funding creates good opportunities for being innovative. Although economic and financial factors have been a clear obstacle to the development of ambitious innovations in the past decade, they have not been extensively discussed in the literature. Moreover, they are often implied or covered by other factors such as organizational issues (e.g., lack of personnel or skills) or technological problems (e.g., lack of infrastructure) that are directly caused by budget constraints (Mulgan/Albury, 2003; Damanpur/Schneider 2009)

Hence, to understand how fundings instruments are being used to finance innovations and their impact on the innovation performance of public organizations is crucial for public manager and practitioners to design effective strategies and allocate resources efficiently (Fan/Pan, 2023).

Consequently, this PhD-project focuses on the following research question: How do financing instruments influence the innovation performance of the public sector in German municipalities?

To approach the question, the example of e-government innovations and the associated financing instruments will be examined, more specifically financing options for OZG implementation.

This study explicates this relationship by using resource-based theory (Bryson et al., 2007) and the capabilities-based view (Andrews et al., 2016) to investigate the main and interaction effects of these intervention on public sector organizations. This theoretical framework hypothesizes that the impact of funding on public sector innovation performance is contingent upon the organizational capabilities of municipalities (Helfat/Peteraf, 2003; Plattfaut et al., 2015).

Organizational capabilities encompass the collective skills, knowledge, structures, processes, and culture that enable organizations to identify, assimilate, and exploit innovation opportunities effectively (cf. Bryson et al., 2007). In the context of German municipalities, organizational capabilities could include leadership support, employee skills, organizational structures, innovation strategies, and the ability to manage and learn from failures. Taking this into account, the research proposes following proposition:

1. Organizations that have a combination of financial resources and supportive internal factors such as organizational culture, skilled employees, suitable infrastructure, and effective governance structures are more likely to attain higher levels of innovation performance.

2. Organizations with proficient financial management skills, encompassing budget planning, resource allocation, and financial risk management, are better equipped to optimize the utilization of financial resources for innovation purposes. This optimization, in turn, leads to improved innovation performance.

3. Organizations with higher levels of financial resources, such as funding or access to grants, are more likely to invest in innovation initiatives, attract talented individuals, and foster an environment conducive to innovation. Consequently, these organizations achieve superior innovation performance compared to those with limited financial resources.

For the methodological approach, this study employs a convergent parallel design of the mixed-methods approach (Creswell/Plano Clark, 2011), combining quantitative analysis and qualitative case studies. The quantitative analysis will involve collecting and analyzing financial data from a sample of local public sector organizations, examining the relationship between different financing instruments and innovation performance indicators. The qualitative case studies will provide a deeper understanding of the specific funding practices and routines of selected public organizations.

The expected findings from this research question will provide insights into the impact of public fundings on the innovation performance of German public sector organizations. The findings may reveal the positive or negative effects of public fundings on different dimensions of innovation performance, such as organizational culture, leadership, resources, processes, and outcomes.

However, the research may face challenges including limited access to data, potential biases in data collection, and complexities in measuring innovation performance. Nonetheless, addressing these challenges and obtaining valuable insights can contribute to the design of effective strategies and efficient resource allocation for public managers and practitioners aiming to foster innovation in the public sector.