Background and objectives

The proposed paper, part of a broader ongoing project investigating dynamics within public organizations, examines the role and importance of professional identity in the practices of Street-level Bureaucrats (SLBs), particularly those oriented towards Organizational Citizenship Behaviors (OCB). OCBs are defined as voluntary and discretionary actions that significantly benefit organizations without direct rewards and are essential for managing public sector challenges such as regulatory changes and budget constraints (Organ, 1988; Podsakoff & MacKenzie, 2006; Hassan, 2015; Levine, 1979; Pandey, 2010; Vigoda-Gadot & Golembiewski, 2005). The literature identifies factors shaping OCB, such as employees' commitment to public service and organizational ethics, as well as aspects like an employee's dedication to public service, job satisfaction, ethical practice perceptions, and goal clarity (Abdelmotaleb & Saha, 2018; de Geus et al., 2020; Ingrams, 2020; Rayner, Lawton & Williams, 2012). However, it neglects a critical factor: the multifaceted concept of professional identity, which potentially shapes SLBs interactions and decision-making processes. This study aims to address this gap and understand the intricate relationship between professional identity and the discretionary practices defining their roles in public service, with a focus on their involvement in OCB, crucial in today’s complex public organizational environment.

Methods

Qualitative thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews with 70 SLBs who provide welfare services in the public sector in Israel.

Preliminary Findings

The professional identity of SLBs does not emerge in a vacuum but is the outcome of numerous factors within and outside the organization. It evolves over time through individual experiences, organizational culture, environmental factors, and interactions with colleagues and clients, shaped by diverse feedback and circumstances. Similarly, it appears that the professional identity of social workers develops through a complex interplay of historical practices and contemporary contexts, which include charity-based work, needs-based social work, and rights-based social work.While the influence of professional identity on discretionary behaviors of SLBs is a proposed factor, the ongoing investigation in this study seeks to empirically explore this relationship. This inquiry is particularly pertinent given the known composition of the decision-making process of SLBs, which encompasses personal, organizational, and cultural factors. The forthcoming findings of this study aim to shed light on the intricate interplay between professional identity and discretionary behaviors among SLBs, specifically OCB-oriented behaviors, contributing to a deeper understanding of their roles within the public sector.

Conclusions

This study emphasizes the significance of professional identity among SLBs, highlighting its impact on their decision-making processes and interactions within the public sphere. These elements gain particular significance in the face of current challenges within public organizations. Enhancing these identities can enhance public services' adaptability and effectiveness, enabling SLBs to implement policies with responsiveness, consistency, and efficiency within a continually evolving service delivery environment. Specifically, this essay may illuminate the crucial role of professional identity in the daily work of social workers and SLBs in general, providing guidance for decision-makers to improve street-level practices.

In the area of zoonosis control, having socially accepted public policy measures is crucial. The COVID-19 pandemic, in which also cats and dogs have been carrier of the virus, has highlighted the importance of research and policy actions to address the risks of infectiously transmittable diseases in connection with companion animals. In modern society, pets have a higher emotional value and a special status compared to other animals. This forms the requirement of particular sensitivity when developing socially acceptable measures for pets in the area of epidemics. In Switzerland, major importance is placed on the public acceptance of policy measures, due to the strong participatory rights of the population in policy design. Street-level bureaucrats with their considerable power in policy implementation and direct interaction with the public are therefore an important group to involve in the development of policies. This article documents the influence of street-level bureaucrats in the field of disease prevention and control measures for companion animals in Switzerland, with a focus on public acceptance. Empirically, the article draws on a qualitative study based on 30 stakeholder interviews, which were held with representatives from different areas relevant to the subject. Furthermore, a stakeholder workshop with 20 participants completes the data source.

Leading-by-example is a key strategy for policy entrepreneurship, nonetheless understudied in general, as well as in street-level policy entrepreneurship. To explore both practices of, and conditions that enable, leading-by- example, this study employs a positive deviance approach, which focuses on street-level bureaucrats (SLBs) who deviate and do not comply with current policy arrangements in an attempt to improve the well-being of the local public. Our analysis builds upon an in-depth case study of the Youth Inclusion project, which aims to enhance bottom-up efforts to prevent and reduce outsiderness among young people in Norway. The research design followed the principles of trailing research and data consisting of participatory observation, documents, and in-depth interviews, for which we used a reflexive thematic content analysis. Preliminary findings suggest that leading-by-example ranges from going the extra mile, through bending the rules, up to direct disobedience with policy instructions. Findings also identify both organizational and cultural conditions that enhance leading-by-example practices. Considering leading-by-example through positive deviance lenses in street-level implementation further exemplifies the importance of mobilizing the knowledge embedded in direct-delivery interactions between SLBs and the local community, who collaborate to identify and carry out practices that address local unmet needs. In addition, leading-by-example that is exercised by SLBs also contributes to the understudied upward processes in policy making.

The subnational implementation of international instruments in federal states is an under- explored process. Subnational entities regularly enjoy a degree of sovereignty, which raises questions such as whether – and how – international instruments are implemented at the subnational level. This paper aims to observe the subnational implementation of international instruments. To structure our analysis, we ask three questions: 1. What discretion do civil servants enjoy in the implementation of international law? 2. To what extent do subnational entities implement and customise the implementation of international law? 3. How do civil servants’ roles and motivations influence implementation? To explore these questions, we propose a model combining two theories of discretion (principal–agent and stewardship) with a typology of the roles and motivations of civil servants. We apply this model to the implementation of EU data protection law in Switzerland, which configures a case of EU external governance, wherein the scope of EU rules extends beyond EU borders. As this case study displays unexpected low levels of implementation, we test our model to observe to what extent civil servants’ discretion, roles and motivations may explain this phenomenon. We carried out an in-depth document analysis and 28 interviews with national and subnational actors involved in the regulation of data protection in Switzerland. The application of our model shows that civil servants’ roles and motivations are aligned with international instruments’ objectives. Thus, civil servants’ actions and discretion do not explain the low degree of implementation. The paper identifies factors leading to this lack of implementation, such as delays in legislative implementation, expertise shortage and financial constraints. The study concludes with a discussion of two separate issues: the relation between discretion and implementation, and the gap between ambitious international instruments and the realities on the ground.