Public Administration Perspective

Understanding the Phenomenon of Trained Incapacity and Identifying its Fusion Factors in Government Organizations

Document Type : Research Article (with mixed approaches)

Authors

1 M.A, Public Administration, Human Resource Development, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, University of Ilam, Ilam, Iran.

2 Department of Public Administration, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, University of Ilam, Ilam, Iran.

3 Department of Education Management, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, University of Ilam, Ilam, Iran.

Abstract

purpose: The main purpose of this study was to understand what and why the phenomenon of trained incapacity in government organizations.
Design/ Methodology/ Approach: Research methodology The use of combined-exploratory method consisted of two stages: qualitative and quantitative. The qualitative part is done through the strategy of data-based theory and the quantitative part is done using structural equation modeling. The statistical population included experts in government organizations in the city of Ilam, which conducted two semi-structured interviews in two methods, targeted and snowball, until theoretical saturation was achieved. The validity of qualitative data was confirmed by the relative coefficient of content validity and content validity index. Then, a questionnaire of 81 questions was designed to test the model, the validity and reliability of which were evaluated with known indicators.
Research Findings: The beginning of the trained incapacity in dimensions of rules of inelastic, Managers Mental intentions, The deterrence role of Managers, Structure Organizational and Organization Process, related to the causative conditions affecting the axial phenomenon were identified the dimensions of Job Routineness, early of Prejudice, Job in adequacy, inferiority feeling and Smart Silence to the organizational Trained Incapacity variable (the axial phenomenon). After confirming the validity of this step, the analysis of quantitative data with Smart PLS software showed that causal factors have a meaningful effect on the visibility of the axial phenomenon. Also, using the sample test, it was found that the current situation of the five dimensions of the concept of disability learned in the study population is higher than normal.
Limitations and consequences: the concept and dimensions that make up learning disability have been left unexplored by researchers. Therefore, the present study tries to reduce the aforementioned theoretical and conceptual gap.
Practical Consequences: Given the prevailing dimensions of disability formation learned in government organizations, managers should adopt appropriate strategies to control this phenomenon by increasing awareness of its causes.
Innovation or value of the Article: The present article introduces one of the lesser known diseases in government organizations and deals with its conceptualization.

Keywords

  1. Burke, K. (1935). Permanence and Change: An Anatomy of Purpose, University of CALIFORNIA.
  2. Creasy, J. (2015). Learning Tools for Overcoming Trained Incapacity; Creating Empowered Behavior in Formerly Disenfranchised Workers, Business Leadership Today, 6 (3): https://www.researchgate.net/publication/284371985
  3. Creswell, J., W. (2012). Research design: qualitative, quantitative and combined approaches, Traslated by Alireaza Kiamanesh, Tehran: Jahad Daneshgahi.
  4. Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16(3), 297-334.
  5. Dalton, D. R, Todor, W. D. (1979). Turnover Turned Over: An Expanded and Positive Perspective, Academy of Management Review, 4 (2), 225-235.
  6. Danaee Fard, H. (2007). Harmony of Quantitative and Qualitative Methods in Organizational Research Reflecting on Mixed Research Strategy, Methodology, 13 (53): 35-63. (in Persian)
  7. Danaee Fard, H. Alvani, M., Azar, A. (2012). Qualitative research methodology in management: a comprehensive approach. Tehran: Saffar. (in Persian)
  8. Davari, A., Rezazadeh, A. (2014). Structural equation modeling with PLS software. Tehran: Jahad. (in Persian)
  9. Denhardt, R. (2011). Theoris of Public Organization. Translated by Mehdi Alvani and Hasan Danaefard, Tehran: Saffar.
  10. Depasquale, Jason P, Geller, Scott. (1999). Critical Success Factors for Behavior Based Safety: A Study of Twenty Industry wide Application. Safety Research, 30 (4): 237-249.
  11. Dorn, C. (2013). An Ecological Approach to Writing Center Studies. Published by ProQuest LLC.
  12. Dubin, R. (1970). Management in Britain — Impressionsofa Visiting Professor, Management Studies. 7, 183-198.
  13. Farasatkhah, M. (2017). Qualitative research method in social sciences with emphasis on Grounded theory. Tehran: Agah. (in Persian)
  14. Faghihi, A., Danaeefard, H. (2011). Bureaucracy and Development in Iran (Historical-Comparative View). Tehran: University of Imam Sadegh.
  15. Gaivoronskaya, Y. V. (2014). Professional Deformations of a Lawyer and Deformations of Legal Mind: Connection and Interaction. Experience of Modern Russia, Asian Social Science; 10 (17): 81-84.
  16. Gholipour, A. (2013). Sociology of Organization: A sociological Approach to Organiation and Management. Tehran: Samt (in Persian)
  17. Gouldner, A. W. (1954). Patterns of Industrial Bureaucracy. The Free Press
  18. Hudson, M. (2012). Veblen’s Institutionalist Elaboration of Rent Theory. Levy Economics Institute
  19. Hughes, O. (2003). Public Management and Administration: An Introduction (3rd ed.). Basingstoke: Macmillan
  20. Jack, J. (2004). The Piety of Degradation: Kenneth Burke, the Bureau of Social Hygiene, and Permanence and Change. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 90 (4): 446-468.
  21. Khamshaya, A. Shiri, A. Yasini, A. (2019). Understanding the Phenomenon of Organizational Insentience and Identifying its Fusion Factors in a Mixed Method Way. Public Administration, 11 (2): 285-308. (in Persian)
  22. Kohen, B. (2008). Introduction to Sociology, Translated ana Adapted by Gholam-Abbas Tavassoli & Reza Fazel. Tehran: Samt
  23. Maccoby, M. (2007). The Leaders We Need: And What Makes Us Follow. Harvard Business School Press.
  24. McAuley, J. Duberley, J. Johnson, P. (2007). Organization Theory: Challenges and Perspectives. Translated by Hasan Danaeefard and Hossein Kazemi, Tehran: Imam Sadegh University.
  25. Méric, J. (2006). Undergraduates and bureaucratic orientation: a survey, Conference: Academy of Management, At Atlanta,
  26. Merton, R. K. (1940). Bureaucratic Structure and Personality, Social Forces, Vol. 18, No. 4, pp. 560-568
  27. Merton, Robert K. (1968). Social Theory and Social Structure. New York: The Free Press.
  28. Mohsenin, S., Esfedani, M, R. (2017). Structural equations based on the partial least squares approach using Smart-PLS software: educational and practical. Tehran: Mehrban. (in Persian)
  29. Molavi, Z, Tahmasebi, R, Danaeefard, H, & Haidizadeh, A. (2019). Bureaucphobia and Perceived National Resilience. Public Organization Management, 7 (2), 83-96 (in Persian)
  30. Moynihan, D. P. (2005). Goal-Based Learning and the Future of Performance Management. Public Administration Review, 65 (2): 203-216.
  31. Merz, F. (2011). Max Weber ́s Theory of Bureaucracy and Its Negative Consequences. GRIN Publishing.
  32. Vahdati, H., Mousavi Nejad, S.H., Hakkak, M., Nazarpoori, A.H. (2019). Presenting a Model of Creative Deviance: A Qualitative Approach. Public Administration Perspective, 10(1), 15-37.
  33. Volti, R. (2011). An Introduction to the Sociology of Work and Occupations. Pine Forge Press.
  34. Nagy, S. Biber, H. (2016). Mixed Methods Research Merging Theory with Practice. Translated by Maghsood Farasatkhah & Zeinab Torkaman, Tehran: Institute for Research an Planning in Higher Education.
  35. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd edit.). mcgraw-hill. Hillsdale, NJ.
  36. Omoleke, I. I. (2004). The Bureaucratic Failure: A Critical Analysis of the Nigerian Government Bureaucracy. Social Sciences, 8:1, 59-67
  37. Parker, S. K., Enhancing Role Breadth Self-Efficacy, The Roles of Job Enrichment & Other Organizational Intervention, Applied Psychology, 210-220.
  38. Ployakova, O. (2014). The Structure of Professional Deformation, Third Annual International Conference «Early Childhood Care and Education», 146, 420-425.
  39. Robins, S. P. (1943). Organizational theory: Structure, design and applications.Translated by Mehdi Alvani & Hasan DanaeeFard, Tehran: Saffar and Eshraghi
  40. Rockart, S. & Mitchell, W. (2006). High Point or hobgoblin? Consistrncy and Performance in Organization,
  41. Saburi, M. (2009). Sociology of Organizational. Tehran: SHABTAB. (in Persian)
  42. Sanders, R. (2016). The Occupational Psychosis of Empire-Building Missionaries
  43. Scott, P G. S, Pandey, K. P, (2005). Red Tape and Public Service Motivation. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 25 (2), 155-180.
  44. Shaw, J, D. Gupta, N, and Delery, J E. (2005), Alternative Conseptualizations of the Relationsahip between Voluntary Turnover and organiational performance. Academy of Management Journal, 48 (1): 50–68.
  45. Stroud, S. R. (2014). John Dewey, Kenneth Burke, and the Role of Orientation in Rhetoric. University of South Carolina Press
  46. Tenenhaus, M., Amato, S., & Esposito Vinzi, V. (2004). A global goodness-of-fit index for PLS structural equation modelling. In Proceedings of the XLII SIS scientific meeting, 1: 739-742.
  47. Tomo, A. (2018). Bureaucracy, Post-Bureaucracy, or Anarchy? Evidence from the Italian Public Administration. International Journal of Public Administration, 42 (6): 482-496.
  48. Watson, C. (2019). Perspective by incongruity in the performance of dialectical ironic analysis: a disciplined approach. Qualitative Research, 20 (1), 91-107.
  49. Wais, E. (2005). Trained Incapacity: Thorstein Veblen and Kenneth Burke. KB Journal, 2 (1):
  50. Waldman, D. A., Carmeli, A., Halevi M. Y. (2011). Beyond the red tape: How victims of terrorism perceive and react to Organizational responses to their suffering. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31, 938-954.
  51. Wetzels, M., Odekerken-Schroder, G., & Van Oppen, C. (2009). Using Pls path Modeling for assessing Hierarchical construct models: Guidelines and empirical illustration. MIS Quartely, 33 (1), 177-1.
  52. Whetten, D A. (1981). Organizational Responses to Scarcity: Exploring the Obstacles to Innovative Approaches.to Retrenchment in Education. Educational Administration Quarterly, 17 (3), 80-97.
  53. Williams, N. M., Sjoberg, G., Sjoberg, A. (1980). The Bureaucratic Personality: An Alternate View. Applied Behavioral Science, 16(3): 389-405.
  54. Yeboah Assiamah, E, Asamoah, K, Agyekum Kyeremeh, T. (2015). Therefore is Bureaucracy Dead? Making a case for Complementarity of paradigms in public Administrative Thinking and Discourse. International Journal of Public Administrative, 39 (5): 382-394.
Public Administration Perspective
Volume 12, Issue 2 - Serial Number 46
June 2021
Pages 52-76