Goal ambiguity and informal discretion in the implementation of public policies: the case of Spanish immigration policy

Abstract

Policy formation does not come to an end when a bill becomes a law. Street-level bureaucrats also play a role in shaping public policies through their daily use of discretion. Through a comparative analysis of the work done by street-level bureaucrats in two different organizations in charge of implementing the Spanish immigration policy, we examined the relation between goal ambiguity and the use of informal discretion using a qualitative method relying on Lipsky’s theoretical framework. Based on the data obtained through five in-depth interviews with street-level bureaucrats in each of the two selected organizations, we confirm the link between goal ambiguity and the use of informal discretion. Besides, our observations also tend to associate a low level of informal discretion to a high level of engagement toward public service values such as impartiality and fairness. Points for practitioners This article offers a practical methodology to identify goal ambiguity and informal discretion in an organization. It provides tools for assessing their level and monitoring their evolution within an organization, which often constitute mandatory steps when working on initiatives related to the reinforcement of common goals in an organization (e.g. service improvement in terms of fairness and impartiality, achieving consistency in the implementation stage of a policy, managing a ‘change agenda’, etc.). It will be of particular interest to practitioners who are in charge of monitoring difficult-to-measure outputs linked to the quality of the process at the implementation stage.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 53 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.