Treść książki
Przejdź do opcji czytnikaPrzejdź do nawigacjiPrzejdź do informacjiPrzejdź do stopki
VictorA.Pestoff
quality;modelsofstakeholdergovernance;and
co-production.Thisreportonlydealswiththefirst
threeofthose;co-productionwillbeconsidered
inmoredetailelsewhere.Herewewillbeginour
theoreticaldiscussionwithworkenvironmentand
servicequality.Karasek&Theorell(1990)notethat
worklifestressisrelatedbothtophysicalillness
andlowerproductivity.Theydevelopedatwo-
dimensionaldemand/controlmodeltounderstand,
analyseandexplaintheworkenvironmentandits
physicalandpsychosocialimpactsonworkersand
organisations.Combiningthesetwodimensions
resultsinthefour-foldclassificationofjobs
illustratedbelow,wheredemandsareexpressedby
thecolumns.Lowdemandscombinedwithhigh
levelsofcontrolresultinlow-strainjobs,whilelow
demandsandlowlevelsofcontrolleadtopassive
jobs.Highdemandscombinedwithhighlevels
ofcontrolresultinactivejobs,butwhencontrol
islowitproduceshigh-strainjobs.Thelatterare
usuallyconsideredmostdebilitatinginworklife.
Theyexpandtheirmodelbyaddingathird
dimension,“socialsupport”atwork.Thatrefers
tooveralllevelsofhelpfulsocialinteraction
availableonthejobfrombothco-workersand
supervisors(ibid.p.69).Theynotethatsocial
supportappearstoprovidebufferingmechanisms
betweenpsychologicalstressorsatworkandadverse
healthoutcomes.Thussocialcontactsandsocial
structureaffectthebasicphysiologicalprocesses
importantbothtothemaintenanceoflong-term
healthandtheacquisitionofnewknowledge.
Accordingly,theynotethat“…together,these
threedimensionsofworkactivity-demand,control
andsocialsupport-arecapableofpredicting
muchoftherangeoftotalvariationindepression
symptomsintheUSpopulation”.Suchsymptoms
increaseinprobabilityfrom6%to41%,given
therightorwrongcombinationofthesefactors.
(Karasek&Theorell,1990,p.72).Laterafourth
work-lifedimensionconcerningthenatureand
intensityofcontactswithclientswasproposed
byPestoff(1998).
Governanceatthemacro,meso
andmicrolevels
Governancebecameabuzzwordabout25years
ago.Todayitisusedinmanydifferentcontexts.
Itisemployeddifferentlyatthemacro,mesoand
microlevels,yettherearesomenotablesimilarities
betweentheusageatvariouslevels.Fromamacro
perspectiveparticipatorygovernanceisrelatedto
conceptssuchasnetworkgovernance,NewPublic
Governanceandco-governanceanditconcerns
publicpolicy-making.Inamulti-levelEuropean
contextitisseenas“amethodormechanismfor
dealingwithabroadrangeofproblemsorconflicts
inwhichactorsregularlyarriveatmutualsatisfac-
toryandbindingdecisionsbynegotiatingwith
eachotherandco-operatingintheimplementation
ofthesedecisions.”(Schmitter,2002,p.53).Itis
positedonhorizontalformsofinteractionbetween
actorswhoaresufficientlyindependentofeach
othersothatneithercanimposeasolutionon
theotherandyetsufficientlyinterdependentthat
bothwouldloseifnosolutionweretobefound.
Theirregularinteractionresultsintrustand
mutualaccommodation(Schmitter,2002,p.53).
Participatorygovernanceusuallyemergesasan
attractive,yetsecond-bestsolutionwhenthereis
significantmarketand/orstatefailure.(Schmitter,
2002,p.54).Itimpliesflexiblecombinationsofboth
publicandprivateauthoritybyrepresentatives
Worklifedemandsanddecisionlatitudeorcontrol:
High
Low
Figure1.Psychologicaldemand/decisionlatitudemodel
Source:Karasek&Theorell,1990,p.32.
Low
High
lowstrain
active
passive
high-strain
8
ZarządzaniePubliczne/PublicGovernance1(47)/2019
