Enhancing responsiveness and consistency: Comparing the collective use of discretion and discretionary room at inspectorates in England and the Netherlands
Discretion used to be considered a feature of individuals, but growing literature shows that it has collective features as well. To develop an understanding of the individual and cooperative work of inspectors in using discretion and the discretionary room granted to them, we compared two inspectora...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Regulation & governance 2017-03, Vol.11 (1), p.81-94 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 94 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 81 |
container_title | Regulation & governance |
container_volume | 11 |
creator | Rutz, Suzanne Mathew, Dinah Robben, Paul Bont, Antoinette |
description | Discretion used to be considered a feature of individuals, but growing literature shows that it has collective features as well. To develop an understanding of the individual and cooperative work of inspectors in using discretion and the discretionary room granted to them, we compared two inspectorates: the Care Quality Commission (CQC) in England and the Joint Inspectorate for Youth (JIY) in the Netherlands. Our analysis reveals that inspectors engage with colleagues, managers, and stakeholders to include other perspectives, gain mandate, and broaden their repertoire. At the CQC, inspectors use their discretion collectively; on their own initiative, they involve others in balancing and interpreting rules to reach judgments. At the JIY, teamwork is central and regulatory teams are granted collective discretionary room. We argue that collective work permits both responsiveness and consistency. In studying the judgments of inspectors and other street‐level bureaucrats, it is vital to look at collective work and how it combines consistency and responsiveness. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1111/rego.12101 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_wiley</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2389081524</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1873084541</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-p2861-5aea654964e519327fb7aa1ae6641d9fa5aa0dde3817d62abe98fecd988783db3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kc9KAzEQxhdRsFYvPkHA89bMZv8k3qSsVSgWRM8h3cy2W7bJmmyVPosva7YVvRmYZL7kNzOEL4qugU4grFuHKzuBBCicRCMoUh5nQsDpb87ZeXTh_YbSnCYJG0VfpVkrUzVmRRz6zhrffKBB74kymlSD9j2aan9HpnbbKTeQ_RrDU9ti1Qea7DwSWxPd-Mph31hzqP2Tyu2Js3ZLVE8a47tQZp3q0QdFSrNqB3yIoe8zht0NV_4yOqtV6_Hq5xxHbw_l6_Qxni9mT9P7edwlPIc4U6jyLBV5ihkIlhT1slAKFOZ5ClrUKlOKao2MQ6HzRC1R8BorLTgvONNLNo5ujn07Z9936Hu5sTtnwkiZMC4ohyxJ_6OAF4zyNEshUHCkPpsW97JzzTZ8XwKVgz9y8Ece_JEv5WxxyNg3x-2JVQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1873084541</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Enhancing responsiveness and consistency: Comparing the collective use of discretion and discretionary room at inspectorates in England and the Netherlands</title><source>Wiley Online Library - AutoHoldings Journals</source><source>PAIS Index</source><source>HeinOnline Law Journal Library</source><source>EBSCOhost Business Source Complete</source><creator>Rutz, Suzanne ; Mathew, Dinah ; Robben, Paul ; Bont, Antoinette</creator><creatorcontrib>Rutz, Suzanne ; Mathew, Dinah ; Robben, Paul ; Bont, Antoinette</creatorcontrib><description>Discretion used to be considered a feature of individuals, but growing literature shows that it has collective features as well. To develop an understanding of the individual and cooperative work of inspectors in using discretion and the discretionary room granted to them, we compared two inspectorates: the Care Quality Commission (CQC) in England and the Joint Inspectorate for Youth (JIY) in the Netherlands. Our analysis reveals that inspectors engage with colleagues, managers, and stakeholders to include other perspectives, gain mandate, and broaden their repertoire. At the CQC, inspectors use their discretion collectively; on their own initiative, they involve others in balancing and interpreting rules to reach judgments. At the JIY, teamwork is central and regulatory teams are granted collective discretionary room. We argue that collective work permits both responsiveness and consistency. In studying the judgments of inspectors and other street‐level bureaucrats, it is vital to look at collective work and how it combines consistency and responsiveness.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1748-5983</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1748-5991</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/rego.12101</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Evanston: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</publisher><subject>Cooperation ; discretion ; discretionary room ; inspectors ; Interest groups ; Quality of care ; Regulation ; street‐level bureaucrats ; Teams ; Teamwork ; Youth</subject><ispartof>Regulation & governance, 2017-03, Vol.11 (1), p.81-94</ispartof><rights>2015 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd</rights><rights>2017 John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Frego.12101$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Frego.12101$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27843,27901,27902,45550,45551</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Rutz, Suzanne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mathew, Dinah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Robben, Paul</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bont, Antoinette</creatorcontrib><title>Enhancing responsiveness and consistency: Comparing the collective use of discretion and discretionary room at inspectorates in England and the Netherlands</title><title>Regulation & governance</title><description>Discretion used to be considered a feature of individuals, but growing literature shows that it has collective features as well. To develop an understanding of the individual and cooperative work of inspectors in using discretion and the discretionary room granted to them, we compared two inspectorates: the Care Quality Commission (CQC) in England and the Joint Inspectorate for Youth (JIY) in the Netherlands. Our analysis reveals that inspectors engage with colleagues, managers, and stakeholders to include other perspectives, gain mandate, and broaden their repertoire. At the CQC, inspectors use their discretion collectively; on their own initiative, they involve others in balancing and interpreting rules to reach judgments. At the JIY, teamwork is central and regulatory teams are granted collective discretionary room. We argue that collective work permits both responsiveness and consistency. In studying the judgments of inspectors and other street‐level bureaucrats, it is vital to look at collective work and how it combines consistency and responsiveness.</description><subject>Cooperation</subject><subject>discretion</subject><subject>discretionary room</subject><subject>inspectors</subject><subject>Interest groups</subject><subject>Quality of care</subject><subject>Regulation</subject><subject>street‐level bureaucrats</subject><subject>Teams</subject><subject>Teamwork</subject><subject>Youth</subject><issn>1748-5983</issn><issn>1748-5991</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7TQ</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kc9KAzEQxhdRsFYvPkHA89bMZv8k3qSsVSgWRM8h3cy2W7bJmmyVPosva7YVvRmYZL7kNzOEL4qugU4grFuHKzuBBCicRCMoUh5nQsDpb87ZeXTh_YbSnCYJG0VfpVkrUzVmRRz6zhrffKBB74kymlSD9j2aan9HpnbbKTeQ_RrDU9ti1Qea7DwSWxPd-Mph31hzqP2Tyu2Js3ZLVE8a47tQZp3q0QdFSrNqB3yIoe8zht0NV_4yOqtV6_Hq5xxHbw_l6_Qxni9mT9P7edwlPIc4U6jyLBV5ihkIlhT1slAKFOZ5ClrUKlOKao2MQ6HzRC1R8BorLTgvONNLNo5ujn07Z9936Hu5sTtnwkiZMC4ohyxJ_6OAF4zyNEshUHCkPpsW97JzzTZ8XwKVgz9y8Ece_JEv5WxxyNg3x-2JVQ</recordid><startdate>201703</startdate><enddate>201703</enddate><creator>Rutz, Suzanne</creator><creator>Mathew, Dinah</creator><creator>Robben, Paul</creator><creator>Bont, Antoinette</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>7TQ</scope><scope>DHY</scope><scope>DON</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201703</creationdate><title>Enhancing responsiveness and consistency: Comparing the collective use of discretion and discretionary room at inspectorates in England and the Netherlands</title><author>Rutz, Suzanne ; Mathew, Dinah ; Robben, Paul ; Bont, Antoinette</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-p2861-5aea654964e519327fb7aa1ae6641d9fa5aa0dde3817d62abe98fecd988783db3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Cooperation</topic><topic>discretion</topic><topic>discretionary room</topic><topic>inspectors</topic><topic>Interest groups</topic><topic>Quality of care</topic><topic>Regulation</topic><topic>street‐level bureaucrats</topic><topic>Teams</topic><topic>Teamwork</topic><topic>Youth</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Rutz, Suzanne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mathew, Dinah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Robben, Paul</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bont, Antoinette</creatorcontrib><collection>PAIS Index</collection><collection>PAIS International</collection><collection>PAIS International (Ovid)</collection><jtitle>Regulation & governance</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Rutz, Suzanne</au><au>Mathew, Dinah</au><au>Robben, Paul</au><au>Bont, Antoinette</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Enhancing responsiveness and consistency: Comparing the collective use of discretion and discretionary room at inspectorates in England and the Netherlands</atitle><jtitle>Regulation & governance</jtitle><date>2017-03</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>11</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>81</spage><epage>94</epage><pages>81-94</pages><issn>1748-5983</issn><eissn>1748-5991</eissn><abstract>Discretion used to be considered a feature of individuals, but growing literature shows that it has collective features as well. To develop an understanding of the individual and cooperative work of inspectors in using discretion and the discretionary room granted to them, we compared two inspectorates: the Care Quality Commission (CQC) in England and the Joint Inspectorate for Youth (JIY) in the Netherlands. Our analysis reveals that inspectors engage with colleagues, managers, and stakeholders to include other perspectives, gain mandate, and broaden their repertoire. At the CQC, inspectors use their discretion collectively; on their own initiative, they involve others in balancing and interpreting rules to reach judgments. At the JIY, teamwork is central and regulatory teams are granted collective discretionary room. We argue that collective work permits both responsiveness and consistency. In studying the judgments of inspectors and other street‐level bureaucrats, it is vital to look at collective work and how it combines consistency and responsiveness.</abstract><cop>Evanston</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</pub><doi>10.1111/rego.12101</doi><tpages>14</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1748-5983 |
ispartof | Regulation & governance, 2017-03, Vol.11 (1), p.81-94 |
issn | 1748-5983 1748-5991 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2389081524 |
source | Wiley Online Library - AutoHoldings Journals; PAIS Index; HeinOnline Law Journal Library; EBSCOhost Business Source Complete |
subjects | Cooperation discretion discretionary room inspectors Interest groups Quality of care Regulation street‐level bureaucrats Teams Teamwork Youth |
title | Enhancing responsiveness and consistency: Comparing the collective use of discretion and discretionary room at inspectorates in England and the Netherlands |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-05T19%3A44%3A53IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_wiley&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Enhancing%20responsiveness%20and%20consistency:%20Comparing%20the%20collective%20use%20of%20discretion%20and%20discretionary%20room%20at%20inspectorates%20in%20England%20and%20the%20Netherlands&rft.jtitle=Regulation%20&%20governance&rft.au=Rutz,%20Suzanne&rft.date=2017-03&rft.volume=11&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=81&rft.epage=94&rft.pages=81-94&rft.issn=1748-5983&rft.eissn=1748-5991&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/rego.12101&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_wiley%3E1873084541%3C/proquest_wiley%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1873084541&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |