Classification of administrative decisions as routine, adaptive, and innovative provides the framework for identification of the multiple roles played by city managers.
Actual discretion accorded managers by their city councils or by a charter is rated for each category within the adaptive and innovative decision classes varies across jurisdictions relative to political circumstances and priorities.
The rating of discretion provides more precise descriptions of role behaviors. The customary general description of tasks is significant. The political context for the various ranges of role behavior can be examined for style of politics and institutional-structural factors.
Political style may in essence be either exclusive or competitive; institutional-structural factors include popular election of the mayor as opposed to council choice of the mayor, independence of any departments of government from manager control, and the election of councillors.
A positive relationship can be found between limitations in the range of discretion accorded city managers and the popular election of councillors and the mayor.
Restrictions of managers' roles can be attributed to conflicting role expectations of managers and elected mayors and councillors. In accord with the common-sense opposition of proponents of council-manager government to popular election of the mayor clear delineations of authority is required.
In the end, 'councillors and the mayor' acting as the representatives of their constituency determine and define policy settings and strategic priorities together within funding constraints – albeit taking into account the advice of management.
Consequently, it is 'management's role' to implement the determinations of a council except where 'delegated authority' is granted.
No comments:
Post a Comment