Background

The increasing complexity of society has led to the expansion of the administrative state. Career executives, especially those in the Senior Executive Service (SES), are delegated significant responsibility in policy implementation. Agency leaders can severely aid or hinder the president’s policy agenda. Thus, presidents have often marginalized and excluded career executives with key decision-making capabilities conflicting with their policy priorities to leave vacancies to fill with political allies. Doherty et al. (2019) describe presidents’ methods to incentivize the departure of high-level bureaucrats, such as involuntary reassignments and encouraging retirement. In their study, Doherty et al. (2019) argue that political conflict with a new presidential administration increases departure among career executives.

Doherty et al. (2019) conducted this study to investigate the effect of position and political ideology on the departure of civil servants after elections. The researchers focused on the exit of high-ranking bureaucrats during the transition from the Obama administration to the Trump administration. The hypotheses of this study were: 1) Civil servants in high-ranking policy positions under the previous administration are more likely to depart from the civil service; 2) Civil servants whose political ideology differs from the president are more likely to depart from the civil service; 3) Civil servants are more likely to strategically exit before a presidential transition if they anticipate conflict with the new president.

This article used survey data to identify the political ideology of SES officials and tracked turnover by examining data from the Office of Personnel Management and the Federal Yellow Book. The findings of this study suggest that bureaucrats with significant policy responsibility are more likely to leave than bureaucrats with little policy responsibility. The researchers also found evidence that bureaucrats’ political ideology and party affiliation influence their decision to leave. Lastly, their findings suggest that bureaucrats expecting conflict with the new president are more likely to depart before the presidential transition (Doherty et al., 2019).

Analysis

This article provides public administration practitioners, especially those in high-ranking positions, an overview of how an administrative transition would impact their desire to continue serving in the public sector or depart for job opportunities in the private sector. For example, Perry & Wise (1990) explored public servants drawn to the government to participate in making good policies, give back to society, and serve others. While differing opinions on politics and policy are not legitimate grounds for transfer or removal, career executives who struggle to work with the presidential administration’s policy agenda are more likely to be reassigned or exit (Doherty et al., 2019). In addition, Langbein & Stazyk (2018) found that employee voice, the ability to state their views about their role and organization, reduces turnover intentions. Conversely, when career executives cannot influence policy, feel their voice is not valued, or anticipate conflict, they are more likely to leave their position than remain in the agency under the new administration (Doherty et al., 2019). Thus, this article is significant to public service motivation because public servants who derive value and worth from their ability to advance their agency’s mission will face challenges if there is an ideological rift between them and the incoming president.

Furthermore, this article’s findings are especially relevant to public administration practitioners because it provides evidence of the lack of separation between politics and public administration. Despite Woodrow Wilson’s (1887) popularized theory of a dichotomy between politics and public administration, in practice, this is not the case. Presidents use tactics to pressure key high-ranking officials from the previous administration to leave if they believe they will conflict with their policy priorities (Doherty et al., 2019). The actions of presidents to drive turnover are utterly antithetical to Wilson’s (1887) idea of administration existing in a sphere outside of politics. As more individuals join the civil service, they should enter with an awareness of the influence of politics on their duties, even though the basis of their role is merit.

As the administrative state grows in response to the expanded need for public services and national defense concerns, legislatures will continue to delegate significant policymaking powers to career executives, who carry their own political beliefs and motivation for public service. A recent Partnership for Public Service study found a decrease of more than 4 points in federal employee satisfaction and engagement under President Biden (Yoder, 2022). With already declining worker morale among federal employees, who often derive value from advancing their agency’s mission, Doherty et al.’s (2019) findings indicate a need to reassess the politicization of public service. If individuals feel that the incoming president controls their ability to make policy progress within their agency, this can discourage prospective public servants. In addition, as the federal workforce ages and younger people enter the workforce, it is important not to undermine public service motivation with politics.

Above all, the departure of career executives can negatively impact the quality of services provided to the general public. For example, during the Trump administration, a mass exodus of government employees occurred, leaving the incoming Biden administration with a shortage of staff across federal agencies (Casella & Miranda Ollstein, 2020). While this enabled President Biden to appoint much senior staff at agencies, the departures drained agencies of decades of expertise and left them below capacity. Moreover, the president can only deliver on key policy priorities with sufficient staff. Thus, not only does the influence of executive control on turnover undermine public service motivation, but it also can negatively affect the public’s ability to receive the necessary services from the government. Therefore, the incoming administration should evaluate if the advantages of driving turnover outweigh the potential for understaffed agencies.

Ultimately, there are areas within this article that can be improved. Despite the compelling evidence presented, this study only examines the transition to the Trump administration, characterized by an unusually high turnover in SES members (Doherty et al., 2019). Including other presidential administrations would have provided a deeper analysis and allowed for the comparison of results. This article also recommends that future studies interview respondents about their experience during administration changes to understand better how presidents create pressure for turnovers. However, there may be more effective ways to solicit responses from SES members due to fears of political repercussions. For example, future studies may want to give respondents anonymity to encourage honest responses and alleviate fears of a backlash. Nonetheless, this article offers essential information to public administration practitioners and the public in understanding the relationship between executive control and turnover amongst high-ranking bureaucrats.

References

Casella, M., & Miranda Ollstein, A. (2020, November 12). Biden confronts staffing crisis at federal agencies. POLITICO. https://www.politico.com/news/2020/11/12/shrinking-workforce-can-hurt-biden-436164

Doherty, K. M., Lewis, D. E., & Limbocker, S. (2019). Executive Control and Turnover in the Senior Executive Service. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 29(2), 159–174. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muy069

Langbein, L., & Stazyk, E. C. (2018). The Anatomy of Retention in the U.S. Federal Government: Exit, Voice, or Money? International Public Management Journal, 21(1), 33–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/10967494.2017.1325806

Perry, J. L., & Wise, L. R. (1990). The Motivational Bases of Public Service. Public Administration Review, 50(3), 367–373. JSTOR. https://doi.org/10.2307/976618

Wilson, W. (1887). The Study of Administration. Political Science Quarterly, 2(2), 197–222. JSTOR. https://doi.org/10.2307/2139277

Yoder, E. (2022, July 13). Federal employee satisfaction, engagement show steep drop under Biden. Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/07/13/federal-employee-satisfaction-survey-biden/