Public Service Motivation in an International

Comparative Perspective: The UK and Germany

Wouter Vandenabeele, Sarah Scheepers and Annie Hondeghem
Public Management Institute, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven

Abstract
Public service motivation refers to the type of motivation to perform behavior
that relates typically to the public sector; such as altruism or public interest.
The concept was originally developed within an American context by James
Perry and other academics. However; one can distinguish a similar, if not
identical, concept in several European countries. This article makes a
comparison between two European cases of public service motivation: the
United Kingdom and Germany. The results show that although there are
similarities between them, there are also marked differences. Our findings
provide the basis for further research to explore the phenomenon in a cross
cultural and international context.
Introduction
Disinterested behavior is an important characteristic of civil services. In
international academic public administration, public service motivation (PSM)
and similar concepts are becoming increasingly important in explaining this
kind of behavior. In this study, we try to determine the nature of PSM by
examining the original concept, as developed by Perry (1996), and comparing
it with British and German variants. We also try to fit PSM into a larger
framework (integrating it into Public Administration) and offer suggestions for
further research on the topic. The article is linked to a larger comparative study
of PSM, covering four European countries (Vandenabeele and Hondeghem,
2005).
Public Service Motivation in Public Administration
Being some of the central themes on which new public management (NPM) is
grounded, rational and public choice theories are frequently applied within
contemporary public administration (Dunleavy and Hood, 1994; Mae Kelly,
1998). However, the explanatory power of these theories when analyzing

Public Policy and Administration Volume 21 No. 1 Spring 2006 13

specific 'public' or government-related behavior remains limited. Most public
administration theorists (Frederickson, 1997; Perry and Wise, 1990) identify
behavior like self-sacrifice, realizing the public interest and altruism as typical
of public servants and it is very hard to explain these in terms of rational
choice. In trying to explain these kinds of action, the concept of PSM was
developed as a counterweight to the motivation of self-interest in rational
choice theories. Perry offered if not the first certainly the most developed
description of the concept. He subsequently constructed a measurement scale
of PSM and a theoretical framework (Perry and Wise, 1990; Perry, 1996;
Perry, 1997; Perry, 2000). Several other authors have since undertaken
research resulting in a stream of publications on PSM (Naff and Crum, 1999;
Brewer et al., 2000; Houston, 2000; Lewis and Alonso, 2001; Lewis and
Frank, 2002).
An overarching Definition of Public Service Motivation
In spite of the fact that public service motivated behavior is generally
acknowledged in the field of public administration, the Perry definition of
PSM is not universally accepted. Perry defines it as 'an individual's
predisposition to respond to motives grounded primarily or uniquely in public
institutions' (Perry and Wise, 1990, p.368). Although some authors have
adopted his definition others have developed their own (Brewer and Selden,
1998, p.418; Rainey and Steinbauer, 1999, p.23) while non-American authors,
do not use the term at all when studying public service motivated behavior
(Chanlat 2003; Pratchett and Wingfield, 1996). It is also evident that the
content of concepts similar to PSM differs according to nation and region. In
a study comparing five international regions, Norris (2003) finds different
motivational impacts of public service values across them. Our own initial
research demonstrated that Perry's measurement model of PSM could not be
replicated satisfactorily in a Belgian environment and some of the dimensions
found by Perry could not be reconstructed at all (Vandenabeele and
Hondeghem, 2004). These differences in both terminology and content
complicate research on PSM and make it difficult to conduct macro-level
comparative studies.
In order to be able to compare effectively, we have constructed an umbrella
definition of PSM, which we hope will resolve the problem. The definition not
only covers PSM in the narrow sense, but also other types of value-laden
behavioral determinants such as ethics and roles. First, our definition goes
beyond self-interest or organizational interest. This does not mean that
individual or organizational interests cannot coincide with the public interest
but, when in competition, the public interest should prevail. Second, following
Rainey and Steinbauer (1999), PSM refers to communities, states, nations or
humankind. This implies that the major relationship, between people who are
encompassed by the concept, is political and PSM is therefore situated within
a political system. Third, in defining the last part of our umbrella term, we
turned to motivational theory. According to Heckhausen (1991), motivation is

14 Public Policy and Administration Volume 21 No. 1 Spring 2006

the general term that covers all processes in which the realization of targeted
behavior is the core element. Motivation only exists in the interaction of
individual values and an actual situation that enables a person to realize these
values (targeted behavior). Motivation is in fact an intermediate variable
between the interaction of individual values and an opportunity for behavior
on the one hand and actual behavior on the other hand.
When we incorporate these elements into a definition, we describe PSM as
'the belief, values and attitudes that go beyond self-interest or organizational
interest, that concern the interest of a larger political entity and that induce,
through public interaction, motivation for targeted action'.

Figure 1: Motivation as an interactive concept

Beliefs values,
attitudes

(Motivation - *> ( Behaviour

Opportunity

Using this definition, we hope to develop a theory of PSM based upon

extensive comparative analysis. However, in this article we will focus on the
element of 'beliefs, values and attitudes' and confine our comparative study to
two countries- the United Kingdom and Germany. It is primarily an
exploratory and descriptive piece of research and does not test hypotheses of
interaction and causality. Future research will provide further evidence of the
other elements that are incorporated in Figure 1. Our definition is used to
provide an overarching framework for analyzing and describing value-related
concepts that we think are an essential element of PSM.
Our Framework of Analysis
In this article we develop only two comparative cases. We use the American
concept developed by Perry, not as a third case but as a framework for
structuring the UK and German variants. The UK variant has been chosen
because it has a distinct public service ethos, which consists of core values,
behaviors and institutions. The German variant, in contrast, focuses more on
the legal and structural elements of public administration. Germany is often
described as the cradle of bureaucracy and is acknowledged to this day for its
efficiency and formal controls.

Public Policy and Administration Volume 21 No. 1 Spring 2006 15

 As stated above we are also focusing in this first stage of our research on
'beliefs, values and attitudes'. We have broadened our examination to all
value-laden behavioral determinants (individual or institutional). These
determinants can act in a motivational fashion whenever an opportunity
presents itself, corresponding to motivational theory. By studying 'public'
value-laden determinants, we hope to obtain a clearer image of the content of
PSM in these countries.
We have used a combination of primary and secondary literature as our
main source of information on beliefs and values. This information is both
normative and empirical. As it is not possible to make a distinction between
these two, both will be incorporated into the analysis. We have assumed that
normative information can be considered as a carrier of institutional values
and thus an empirical indicator of the presence of a certain set of values within
an institution (Scott, 2001).
The analysis described in this article consisted of four steps. First, we
placed the two case studies in context by describing the origins of the present
civil services in both countries and the key characteristics that explain their
public ethos and ethics. Second, the content of the individual items of the four
dimensions of Perry's model are analyzed. The analysis provided us with a
pattern (no third case) for describing every dimension in terms of a few core
elements to structure our comparative case study research. Third, we
conducted a literature review of motivation and value-related research. These
results were discussed with various UK and German public administration
scholars, to check for possible omissions in our initial search.' This
information was clustered according to the pattern developed in our first step
(Yin, 1981). As anticipated, more dimensions appeared during this process and
these were added to our framework. Finally, both sets of core elements were
combined in order to make a profound and systematic comparison of possible
dimensions of PSM.
The United Kingdom
The historical and institutional context is important in understanding PSM in
the UK. First the UK is a parliamentary system with no written constitution, a
constitutional monarch, a strong executive and a disciplined two-party system.
By the 1830s steps towards a constitutional monarchy were irreversible, with
the Crown gradually leaving the political arena (Parris, 1969). Parliament was
becoming the main actor within the political system as political parties were
emerging to contest control of government as it was expanding its role and
activities. There was a need for an efficient, permanent and apolitical civil
service to provide stability. Together with the Crown, the new civil service
would not meddle in political affairs but offer a constitutional roadmap.
The UK system of government was traditionally based on common law and
custom known as the royal prerogative. As the Crown waned its prerogative
powers came to be exercised by ministers drawn from parliament. The
prerogative powers related to the machinery of government and servants of the

16 Public Policy and Administration Volume 21 No. 1 Spring 2006

Crown - so the permanent bureaucracy emerged outside of statute law and has
developed and changed over the last 150 years without a statutory framework.
The modem civil service, created in 1854, was the result of the Northcote-
Trevelyan Report (1853). It was modeled on the Indian civil service, which
was based on merit instead of patronage, the dominance of the generalist, a
career structure and anonymity (Fry, 2000; Greenaway, 1995). It took more
than 50 years to transform the old British patronage system but by 1920 the
modem civil service was firmly entrenched and a distinct public service ethos
developed. The service attracted recruits from an exclusive social class into its
higher levels and these senior civil servants became the main advisors to the
government as well as responsible for implementing policy. The lower level
civil servants were all recruited by open competition on the basis of merit and
entered a career.
In the 1960s criticisms of the civil service grew. The Labour Government
accepted most of the recommendations made by the Fulton Committee (Fulton
Report, 1968), although its initial impact was rather limited (Theakston,
1995). It proved to be a watershed in British administrative history, however,
and the civil service was substantially reformed 10 years later, under the
Thatcher premiership. The former hierarchical, centralized structure was
fragmented into decentralized agencies (Winstone, 2003). The service was
managerialised and adopted many of the practices of private businesses. As a
consequence new values have been introduced as public services have been
marketised.
However, the senior civil service (SCS) one of the most important power
bases in the British political system, has survived. Although it is now open to
external recruits and its homogeneity has consequently decreased, the SCS
continues to play a major part in administrative and political life. It has always
been seen as the guardian of the public service ethos and continues to do so at
the present time when it appears under threat.
The German Case
In Germany, there is a distinction between public servants (Angestellte) and
civil servants (Beamte) (von Wersebe, 1986). Civil servants have tenure,
cannot strike and are expected to make a career within the service (Derlien,
2003; Wollmann and Schroter, 2000). They are recruited, trained and
promoted in accordance with the principle of merit, their salary is defined by
public law and they are assured lifelong tenure. They are found mainly in the
federal and regional (Linder) levels of government. Angestellte in contrast are
contracted employees, who usually work in the social sectors, health care and
at the level of local governments. They do not automatically build a career and
in principle face the possibility of dismissal. In addition, their earnings can be
negotiated. However, this dichotomy is only relative, as civil servants
sometimes have a limited labour contract and do not always seek a career
while Angestellte may carry out the same work as Beamte and have similar
salaries and terms and conditions.

Public Policy and Administration Volume 21 No. I Spring 2006 17

 Like in the UK, the German civil service is one of the few constants in the
tumultuous history of Germany. Given that historically political regimes
changed frequently, there was a need for a stable and effective system of
administration (Knill, 1999; Hattenhauer, 1993; Derlien, 1991). That stability
still lives on today, but in part because the principles, which underpin the civil
service are incorporated into the constitution, which is difficult to change. It
also indicates that in contrast to the UK the civil service is rooted in law rather
than convention and it has less of a constitutional role.
Within a legalistic state system such as Germany, there is a special status of
civil servants, the 'Berufsbeamtentum', which is functionally and historically
justified and legitimized by their specific relation of duty to the state and the
sovereign character of public tasks (Meyer and Hammerschmid, 2005). The
resulting 'Beamtenethos' (civil servants ethos) includes core elements of the
public servants' identity. The origins of this can be traced to eighteenth century
Prussia, where a professional civil service was institutionalized and
simultaneously the Allgemeines Preuf3isches Landrecht (Prussian common
law) was codified (Derlien, 2003). This marked the first step towards the
introduction of constitutional law, since the Landrecht was a kind of
constitution in which - among other things - the rights and duties of the
Fiirstendiener (the king's servants) were laid down. It is significant that the
role of these servants was no longer defined as being 'personal' servants, but
'public' servants. Their relations with the state were now fixed in public law,
and any disputes were treated by administrative law procedures (Derlien,
2003).
Around 1815, the state machinery had expanded to such an extent, that civil
servants started to become more and more specialized in one specific field of
public administration and were employed accordingly. Specialization was the
logical complement of professionalism. Citizens turned to public servants for
advice concerning taxes, building permits, public roads and so on. Decisions
were no longer taken arbitrarily by unpaid placemen but on the basis of formal
rules and by paid, full-time public servants. It took more than a decade before
the essential characteristics of the modern German civil service (lifelong
tenure, no right to strike, etc.) were established.
These changes in Prussia were paralleled in the development of
bureaucratic systems in the separate German states and principalities each
with their different constitutions. Each state had professional public servants
in common and their administrations were based on formal rules, which made
their operations uniform and predictable. One of the consequences was that
laymen could no longer perform public service work so specialised training
was organized (Bendix, 1962).
Although there have been some shifts in focus in the conception of this
ethos e.g. whether or not it should be overtly linked to a Christian (Lutheran)
ethic or not, the ethos' core values -that stem back to eighteenth century
Prussia - have hardly ever been put into question. That is, until the
modernization reforms that started in Germany after the unification in 1989

18 Public Policy and Administration Volume 21 No. 1 Spring 2006

and New Public Management (NPM) was introduced. Because the principles
on which the civil service is based are framed within the constitution, the
service maintains a rather conservative character. It is only recently that new
values have become more or less embedded within it, under the influence of
the NPM movement.
Dimensions of Perry's Model of Public Service Motivation Compared
Perry and Wise refer to PSM as motives, which should be understood as
psychological deficiencies or needs. Perry (1996) highlights four such
motives: attraction to public policymaking, commitment to the public interest
and civic duty, compassion, and self-sacrifice. It is this model which we use
initially as a benchmark for our comparative study.
In order to establish a PSM concept, we have relied on the role and values
(value laden behavioral determinants) that are attributed to the civil servants in
both countries, as well as the values, which are deemed to be essential to the
public service as an institution. In the UK, the public service ethos has always
been explicit, whereas in Germany, such an ethos is less outspoken.
The first dimension of Perry's PSM model is the attraction to policymaking
and politics..

Table 1: Attraction to Politics and Policymaking

United States United Kingdom
Policymaking Policymaking
Regard of politicians Primacy of politics
Multiple loyalties (diminished
loyalty to minister)
Germany
Defense of policies
Primacy of politics
Loyalty to minister

In the UK, until the Blair premiership, civil servants were focused on
policymaking and implementation. Despite a shifting focus towards
management, it still remained a major task of senior civil servants
(Greenaway, 1995; HC Public Administration Select Committee, 2002).
Today, however, their strategic role in the policymaking process has been
partly taken over by special advisers (Richards and Smith, 2004), although
they are still involved in the translation of policy into action. Civil Servants are
also expected to act as a constitutional sounding board when requested
(Chapman, 1997; HC Committee on Standards in Public Life 2000). Further,
in the UK, there is a strong primacy of politics (Chapman, 2000a; Cubbon,
1993) although it is not always clear to whom this primacy is directed. There
appears today to be a multiple loyalty, to both the executive and the legislature.
O'Toole (2000) distinguishes five types of loyalty2 that counterbalance each
other, and thus create some discretion for the civil servant. The general
principle is that political primacy is directed towards the departmental
minister, as a complement to ministerial responsibility. However, since the

Public Policy and Administration Volume 21 No. 1 Spring 2006 19

Thatcher era, there have been numerous conflicts between government and the
civil service, which has resulted in a diminished loyalty towards ministers
(Coxall and Robins, 1998).
In contrast to the UK case, in Germany (senior) civil servants have never
been occupied as much with policymaking as with defending the policies of
their ministers to the people (Goetz, 2000; Knill, 1999). This kind of
'functional politicization' of the higher civil service implies 'a greater
sensitivity of civil servants for consideration of political feasibility, and
institutes a kind of political self-control of top bureaucrats through their
anticipation of the reactions of the cabinet and of parliament to the ministers'
policy proposals and legislative drafts' (Mayntz and Derlien, 1989, p.402).
They are charged with the implementation of politically determined policy-
decisions. This originates from a well-established primacy of politics. This
arrangement demands great loyalty to the departmental minister (Kugele
1978). Consequently, in contrast again to their UK counterparts, senior civil
servants belong to the same political parties as their departmental ministers
(Goetz, 2000; Mayntz and Derlien, 1989).
One of the purposes of introducing NPM and contract management into the
civil service was to establish a firmer separation between politics and the civil
service, diminishing the 'functional politicization' of the higher civil service.
According to Derlien, this goal is far from being accomplished (Derlien,
2000). Also Bogumil (2003) mentions that there seems to be a lack of will to
let go of the concept of the 'politische Beamte' (political civil servants).

Table 2: Public interest

United States United Kingdom Germany
Community interest Government of the day Local interest
Meaningful public service Public welfare Public welfare
Civic duty Defending rule of law

The items Perry constructed in relation to the public interest are centered
round three themes. First, the idea that the realization of the public interest is
delivering meaningful public service; second, public service is considered the
civic duty of citizens; third, the public interest refers to the level of the local
community and not the nation.
The public interest is one of the most important dimensions of the UK
concept of PSM (Woodhouse, 1997; Chapman, 1997; O'Toole, 1997) although
it is not always clear to what this interest refers. For civil servants it correlates
highly with governmental interest, or the interest of the (central) government
that is in power (Chapman, 2000a; Chapman, 2000b; Greenaway, 1995).
Nevertheless, it also refers to something bigger than the governmental interest,
a type of collective common interest. An important aspect of this common
interest is the creation of public welfare (Woodhouse, 1997) and it is broadly

20 Public Policy and Administration Volume 21 No. I Spring 2006

accepted that this is an important task of the public sector in general and the
civil service in particular. According to Johnson (1985), this element is
traceable to the Keynesian spirit of the 1950s, although today's focus is more
on enabling than on provision.
In Germany, in contrast to the situation in the UK, the dimension of public
interest refers not to the national level but to local communities and
administrations. The public officials at the federal level (both employees and
civil servants) do not consider Germany as an institution with its own interests,
but try to realize the public interest by maintaining the rule of law within the
republic (Hattenhauer, 1993). As the bulk of public employees are employed
at state or local level, they realize the public interest through the effective
upholding of citizens' social rights (Goetz, 2000; Wollmann and Schroter,
2000).
Table 3: Compassion
United States United Kingdom Germany
Compassion (emotional) Public welfare Public welfare
Need for social policy
Perry's dimension of compassion consists of two levels. First, there is the
individual level of compassion, which is elaborated in a rather emotional,
humanitarian way. Second, there is a level of aggregate compassion, which
refers more to government responsibility and social policy. The first is
recorded by the contribution of public officials to local good works and
community involvement. The second by the involvement of government
bodies in responding to social needs.
In the UK, little attention is given to the compassion of civil servants,
neither on an individual nor on a collective level. They are not expected to
demonstrate publicly through community activities or donations. Their work,
however, may involve them in meeting social needs. Here there is some
overlap between the various dimensions as there is a link with the dimension
public interest. Providing or enabling public welfare can be seen as a collective
instance of this compassion.
The same is true for Germany. As 'compassion' is thought to be in conflict
with 'objectivity' and 'neutrality' (Hattenhauer, 1993), there is only a minimal
attention to compassion within the civil service either on an individual level or
a collective one. At most, we can refer to the need for social solidarity and
equality, connecting the issue again to the public interest (Meyer and
Hammerschmid, 2005).

Public Policy and Administration Volume 21 No. I Spring 2006 21

Table 4: Self-sacrifice
United States United Kingdom Germany
Public interest Disinterestedness Public interest
Self-sacrifice Self-sacrifice
Public service as a calling

The self-sacrifice dimension of the PSM model Perry constructed is mainly

focused on sacrificing personal interest for a greater good. In this respect, this
dimension is also connected with the public interest dimension (Table 2). This
is demonstrated by Perry in his study of the inter-factor correlation between
the two dimensions (Perry, 1996).
Sacrifice and disinterestedness are important values within the UK civil
service (O'Toole, 1998; Woodhouse, 1997; Greenaway, 1995). Altruism and
overriding personal interest have held a very important place within its public
administration history. Duty was considered as something crucial and an office
was seen as a calling, rather than a job (Livingstone and Wilkie, 1981;
Woodhouse, 1997). From the 1920s until the 1960s, the issue of duty and self-
sacrifice were both emphasized by successive heads of the civil service
(Chapman, 2000b).
There is less reference to this dimension in the German case. The values of
duty and self-sacrifice were more common during the eighteenth and nineteenth
centuries but in post-war Germany, they have received a politically incorrect
connotation. One can only speak of self-sacrifice in the sense that a civil servant
must strive towards a public interest and that he or she must do anything needed
to protect the democratic values of the state, even when it does not coincide with
his personal values (Hattenhauer, 1993; Wollmann and Schroter, 2000).
Comparison of Other Elements of Public Service Motivation
The American concept of PSM, developed by Perry, consists of only four
dimensions. However, in looking for motivational values in public institutions
in the UK and Germany, other value-laden determinants surfaced. Although
they cannot be compared to the Perry model, when comparing the UK and
Germany they yield extra information on the content of PSM in both those
environments.
Table 5: Equality
United Kingdom Germany
Equal treatment Equal treatment
Democracy
One value is equality. Although it is an element of of bureaucracy (see Table
8), it is treated seperately here because it also has a non-bureaucratic

22 Public Policy and Administration Volume 21 No. 1 Spring 2006

dimension (especially in Germany). Within the UK civil service, neutrality and
objectivity are very important (Woodhouse, 1997; HL Public Service
Committee, 1998; Greenaway, 1995) and the principle of equal treatment, of
both civil servants and the public, is very strong. This is similar to the German
situation. As Germany has a longer bureaucratic tradition than it has a
democratic tradition (Hattenhauer, 1993; Wollmann and Schroter, 2000), the
former has always been the dominant one. Equal treatment of citizens, but also
equality between civil servants was very important. After the Second World
War, the basis for equality changed as democracy became entrenched in the
constitution and within the civil service. Equality is now mainly linked to
defending democracy and is obviously more than a bureaucratic value.
Table 6: Service delivery
United Kingdom Germany
Major role since 1 980s Major role since 19th century
Efficiency Upholding constitutional welfare and
Quality social rights after World War 11
Until the 1980s, service delivery was not a major issue in the UK. Previously,
the civil service was more focused on policymaking and policy
implementation (see also Table 1) . However, the market reforms during the
1980s and 1990s changed this significantly. Successive Conservative
governments introduced NPM reforms, which meant a new approach towards
service delivery (market and customer orientation). This has gained renewed
importance since 1997 as Blair has made it one of New Labour's key issues
(Cabinet Office, 2004). Once viewed as subjects and citizens the public is now
viewed as consumers of public services. The role of the civil service is to
deliver quality services, efficiently and effectively and to be responsive to the
consumers whilst increasingly in competition with private providers. Thus the
values of efficiency and quality have entered their ethical framework.
In Germany, however, service delivery has long been an issue. The early
development of a welfare state was considered as compensation for the lack of
democracy in early Germany (Goetz, 2000). After World War II, the welfare
state was further developed. Today, German civil servants are more concerned
with delivering services than they are with policymaking (Goetz, 2000;
Wollmann and Schroter, 2000; Derlien, 2003). Service provision is deemed to
be in the public interest to the extent that such services are a matter of
'guaranteeing the conditions for life which are the constitutional responsibility
of a 'social state', [and] are provided for the purpose of creating greater
equality within society, and, as far as possible, are capable of establishing
uniform living conditions and quality of life right across the population"
(Konig and Siedentopf, 2001, p.280).

Public Policy and Administration Volume 21 No. I Spring 2006 23

Table 7: Technical Competence
United Kingdom Germany
Generalist knowledge Legal knowledge
Professional and managerial competencies Professional competencies
Merit Merit
Although it appears to be a neutral topic, technical competencies cast a
value-laden shadow over our discussion. First, in the UK, knowledge and
expertise have traditionally been the most important competencies in the civil
service. Civil servants are deemed to possess expertise and low standards are
not tolerated (O'Toole, 2000; Studlar, 1996). The best safeguard for this
knowledge in the core administrative structure is thought to be a generalist
education (Chapman, 2000b). Generalists, especially those with intellectual
skills, are highly respected and only since the Fulton Report has the esteem for
generalists weakened and the administrative core been opened up to specialists
and managers. Second, a civil service career has also always been founded on
merit. This principle of merit was established to counter patronage and
politicization, but it has also been an important guarantee to assure quality and
professionalism of the civil service (Woodhouse, 1997). Third, as stated
above, recent reforms have shifted the roles of senior civil servants from policy
advisors to managers. Civil servants (especially senior civil servants) are
expected now to display general managerial competencies and leadership
(Cabinet Office, 2005). With this shift, performance-orientation and quality
management have become important values, together with the values of the
traditional public service ethos (Cabinet Office, 1999).
With the advent of the constitutional state in Prussia in the nineteenth
century, legal knowledge became the single most important element in the
training for civil servants. Legalist reasoning was designed to counterbalance
political arbitrariness and nepotism. A preponderance of lawyers in the
(senior) civil service and the focus on professional qualities and education
has remained characteristic of the German civil service. However, during two
episodes of German administrative history, these professional values were of
less importance. During the Nazi-period, adherence to national-socialism
was more important than professional competencies, although the system
relied on competent civil servants to run an effective war administration.
After World War II (for West Germany) and re-unification (for East
Germany), professional values regained their former status and today the bulk
of senior civil servants still enjoy a legalist education (Konig and Siedentopf,
2001). Despite the introduction of NPM in Germany, the conviction remains
that lawyers possess the necessary qualities to be good civil servants (Loffler
et al., 2002).

24 Public Policy and Administration Volume 21 No. 1 Spring 2006

Table 8: Bureaucracy
United Kingdom Germany
Equality Equality
Objectivity Formality
Impartiality Discipline
Independence Hierarchy
Permanency (decreasing) Continuity
Anonymity (decreasing) Rule of law
Accountability (multiple)
As mentioned before (Table 5), equal treatment of the public is a very
important value within the UK civil service. Equality and objectivity are key
values but so too are impartiality and neutrality towards the political branch of
government. Many scholars contend impartiality is the key value of the civil
service (Chapman, 2000b; Woodhouse, 1997; O'Toole, 1998) because it
enables the civil service to adapt itself seamlessly to changing parliamentary
majorities. Even with the market-oriented reforms of the last few decades,
which caused the civil service to move closer to a business organization
model, impartiality remained the cornerstone of the civil service (Horton
2001). Because of the various roles a civil servant has to fulfill, a certain
degree of permanency is necessary, otherwise their independence and the
ability to 'speak truth to power' is endangered (Richards and Smith, 1998).
Anonymity is another important value associated with the bureaucratic way of
proceeding (O'Toole, 1997; Bevir and Rhodes, 2003; HC Public
Administration Select Committee, 2002). It is the bureaucratic complement of
ministerial responsibility. Secrecy about civil servants' relationships with
politicians is also an important principle (Richards and Smith 1998; HL Public
Service Committee, 1998). Anonymity is less protected than it used to be
(Coxall and Robins, 1998) and this has caused the accountability scheme to be
altered. Civil servants are becoming more directly accountable to Parliament
and no longer solely through their minister (HL Public Service Committee,
1998; HC Public Administration Select Committee, 2002). These
characteristics collectively constitute the British public sector ethos.
The German administration is based on a Weberian ideal-type of
bureaucracy. This is summarized as a continuous administration based on
formal rules and written documents by anonymous civil servants. The
administration is divided into hierarchical units and executed by experts who
are subject to rigorous discipline and control (de Boer and Riemersma).
Although this ideal-type still lives on, some reforms have been introduced
(Derlien, 2003; Loffler et al., 2002). Due to the politicization of the higher
civil service, continuity is only a relative concept. Since the 1990s,
bureaucracy is no longer considered as the universal most efficient system of

Public Policy and Administration Volume 21 No. 1 Spring 2006 25

organization, as administrative structures come under increasing pressure
(Derlien, 2003). At a local level, these reforms have advanced more, compared
to the state and federal level (Konig, 1997). One final element, which
characterizes German bureaucracy, is the rule of law. This concept was central
to German political thought even before the creation of Germany in 1871. It
was considered to be a legal limitation on civil service discretion (de Boer and
Riemersma, no date). This belief is still present (Strohm, 2001; Konig, 2003).
Formal rules and procedures, which regulate public life, are deemed essential
(Benz and Goetz, 1996).
Conclusions
To a certain extent, our comparison demonstrates that PSM is a universal
concept. All four of Perry's dimensions are found when describing the UK and
German variants. However, when we look closer, several differences are
revealed. For example, the policy process and, consequently, the loyalty to
politicians, differ between the original Perry model and both European cases.
Also, the basis of the public interest varies, as does the reference level.
Whereas the original American model focuses on the (unspecified)
community, the UK focuses on the government, whereas in Germany it is
provincially and locally oriented. The role of the individual versus the
collective (government) relating to the relief of the needs of the
underprivileged - a humanitarian compassion versus social policy - is
different between the American model and the European cases. In Europe,
welfare is considered to be a governmental duty, whereas in the United States,
with its focus on the individual, government is expected only to alleviate vital
needs and act in a residual role. Finally, the extent to which self-sacrifice is
institutionalized is also a matter of difference. In the UK, it is deemed to be
one of the cornerstones of the civil service, whereas in Germany, it is not
highlighted as a value in public administration literature.
A further comparison of the UK and the German cases shows that PSM not
only consists of the dimensions introduced by Perry but several additional
elements. First, the notion of equality in Germany is defined within the
constitution and is broader than in the UK, where civil servants only consider
equal treatment. Next, there are distinct service delivery traditions. The
German tradition of service provision has existed for more than a century and
is welfare-state oriented, Although there was a temporary period of a welfare
state in the UK from 1945 to the 1980s, more recently service provision is
increasingly commercially oriented and focused on consumers rather than
subjects or citizens and on needs rather than rights. Another difference
between the cases is the competencies demanded from public servants.
Although these dimensions have been mitigated a little, one can still speak of
a generalist tradition in the UK and a legalist tradition in Germany. Also, the
bureaucratic traditions are different. Germany is still close to a classic
Weberian model - a hierarchical and formal organization - whereas the UK's
bureaucratic values are based upon a more pragmatic approach to the politico-

26 Public Policy and Administration Volume 21 No. I Spring 2006

administrative question - an impartial administration in support of the
government of the day. However, in the UK, this bureaucracy seems to be in
decay, as a large part of the original civil service has been agencified and
business oriented (Winstone, 2003).
These differences between the British and the German cases show that the
values, beliefs and attitudes (the predispositions to behave in a particular way)
concerning public service are not the same in both countries. According to our
framework, we assume that different administrative traditions will have an
impact on how PSM manifests itself and that it is likely therefore to be case-
specific. This points us towards the explanatory framework of new
institutionalism. Institutions are defined as formal or informal, structural,
societal or political phenomena that surpass the individual level and are based
on more or less common values. They have a certain amount of stability and
they influence behavior (Peters, 2000). Contrary to rational and public choice
theories new institutionalism considers motivational values not as exogenous
but as endogenous variables (March and Olsen, 1989). This means that
whereas motivation is always self-interested in rational choice theories, it is
shaped within new institutionalism in the institutions according to institutional
values. This fits our observation of a varying conception of PSM depending on
country or region. The institutions and their administrative history explain
most of the features found in a specific PSM concept. This also explains the
multidimensional appearance of PSM, as these institutions are structured in a
systemic way and relate to one another. Whenever studying PSM, these
institutions should be taken into account, because ignoring them will probably
results in violating concept validity.
Comments and Further Research
When reviewing this analysis, some restrictions have to be borne in mind.
First, the research was conceived as a literature-based exploratory exercise
based on a body of scientific literature, which offer a profound overview of
the administrative values in the UK and Germany. No hypothesis has been
tested empirically and so the results should be considered with caution.
Second, one should also be aware of the general character of the comparison.
Obviously, certain examples of behavior within the public service may be
motivated more by some values than others, depending on how well they are
institutionalized within the public service institution. Also, some groups
within the public service may be more predisposed to these values than
others. For instance, research (Pratchett and Wingfield, 1996) has
demonstrated that those public officials who are closer to the private sector,
have an ethos that is less (although still substantially) oriented towards the
public sector.
As it is only an exploratory study, there are many avenues for further
research. First, the features of the UK and the German concept of PSM should
be empirically tested before arriving at relative certainty on the nature and
content of both concepts. We aim to set up a pan-European research program,

Public Policy and Administration Volume 21 No. I Spring 2006 27

measuring not only the nature of PSM in different countries in Europe, but also
testing the relationships incorporated in Figure 1. Furthermore, the origins of
PSM will be retraced by means of hypotheses based on new institutional
premises. Finally, the impact of PSM on public human resource management
(HRM) will be studied. This would enable public HRM to add an applied
component to its broadened theoretical foundation, also strengthening the ties
between HRM and public administration.
Notes
1. We would like to thank Roger Depre, Jeroen Maesschalck, Sylvia Horton, Richard
Chapman, Edward Page, Perri 6, Helmut Klages, Hans-Ulrich Derlien, Patrick von
Maravic, and Klaus K6nig for their valuable advice on the development of the
cases. Nevertheless, the statements in this article solely represent the opinions of
the authors and every mistake is theirs.
2. Loyalty to the minister, to the superior officer, to the administration, to the
democratic system and to parliament.

References
Benz, A. and Goetz, K.H. (1996), A New German Public Sector? Reform, Adaptation
and Stability, (Hampshire, England: Dartmouth Publishing Company Limited).
Bevir, M. and Rhodes, R.A.W. (2003), Interpreting British Governance, (London:
Routledge).
Bogumil, J. (2003), 'Die politische Fuhrung offentlicher Dienst - M6glichkeiten un
Grenzen der Reorganisation', in Conrad, P. and Koch, R. (eds), New Public Service,
(Wiesbaden: Gabler Verlag), pp. 12-17.
Brewer, G.A. and Selden, S.C. (1998), 'Whistle blowers in the federal civil service:
new evidence of the public service ethic', Journal of Public Administration
Research and Theory, Vol 8, No 3, pp.413-39.
Brewer, G.A., Selden, S.C. and Facer II, R.L. (2000), 'Individual conceptions of public
service motivation', Public Administration Review, Vol 60, No 3, pp.254-64.
Cabinet Office (1999), Modernising Government, (London: HMS Stationery Office).
Cabinet Office (2004), Civil Service Reform - Delivery and Values, (London: Cabinet
Office).
Cabinet Office (2005), Senior Civil Service Competence Framework.
http://www.civilservice.gov.uk/management_of_the_civil_service/senior_civil_ser
vice_performance_and_reward/scs_competences/index.asp accessed on
2005/07/17.
Chanlat, J.-F. (2003), 'Le managerialisme et l'ethique du bien commun la question de
la motivation au travail dans les services publics', in Duvillier, T., Genard, J.-L. and
Piraux, A. (eds), La Motivation au Travail dans les Services Publics, (Paris:
L'Harmattan).
Chapman, R.A. (1997), 'The end of the British civil service', in Barberis, P. (ed.), The
Civil Service in an Era of Change, (Aldershot: Dartmouth), pp.23-37.
Chapman, R.A. (2000a), 'Ethics in public service for the new millennium', in
Chapman, R.A. (ed.), Ethics in Public Service for the New Millennium, (Aldershot:
Ashgate), pp.217-31.
Chapman, R.A. (2000b), 'Setting standards in a new organization: the case of the
British civil service commission', in Chapman, R. (ed.), Ethics in Public Service for
the New Millennium, (Aldershot: Ashgate), pp.93-1 10.

28 Public Policy and Administration Volume 21 No. 1 Spring 2006

Coxall, B. and Robins, L. (1998), Contemporary British Politics, (Basingstoke:
Palgrave).
Cubbon, B. (1993), 'The duty of the professional', in Chapman, R.A. (ed.), Ethics in
Public Service, (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press), pp.7-13.
de Boer, J. and Riemersma, C. (no date), De Duitse bureaucratie. Kameralistiek, Weber
en de politieke bureaucraten, pp.14-19.
Derlien, H.-U. (1991), 'Historical Legacy and Recent Developments of the German
Higher Civil Service', International Review of Administrative Sciences, Vol 57,
pp.385-401.
Derlien, H.-U. (2000), Verwaltungsdienst im Wandel, (Bamberg: University of
Bamberg).
Derlien, H.-U. (2003), 'German Public Administration: Weberian Despite
Modernization', in Tummala, K.K. (ed.), Comparative Bureaucratic Systems,
(Lexington Books), pp.97-122.
Dunleavy, P. and Hood, C. (1994), 'From old public administration to new public
management', Public Money and Management, Vol 14, No 3, pp.9-16.
Frederickson, H.G. (1997), The Spirit of Public Administration, (San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass).
Fry, G.K. (2000), 'The British civil service system', in Bekke, H.A.G.M. and van der
Meer, F.M. (eds), Civil Service Systems in Western Europe, (Cheltenham: Elgar),
pp.12-35.
Goetz, K.H. (2000), 'The Development and Current Features of the German Civil
Service System', in Bekke, H.A.G.M. and van der Meer, F.M. (eds), Civil Service
Systems in Western Europe, (Cheltenham: Elgar), pp.61-91.
Greenaway, J. (1995), 'Having the bun and the halfpenny: can old public service ethics
survive in the new whitehall?' Public Administration, Vol 73, No 3, pp.357-74.
Hattenhauer, H. (1993), Geschichte des Deutschen Beamtentums, (Koln: Carl
Heymanns Verlag).
HC Committee on Standards in Public Life (2000), Reinforcing Standards - Sixth
Report of the Committee on Standards in Public Life, (London: HMSO).
HC Public Administration Select Committee (2002), The Public Service Ethos HC 263-
I, (London: House of Commons).
Heckhausen, H. (1991), Motivation and Action, (Berlin: Springer-Verlag).
HL Public Service Committee (1998), Report, (London: House of Lords).
Horton, S. (2001), 'The evolution of the civil service in the United Kingdom: From
constitutional bureaucracy and public administration to constitutional ad-hocracy
and public management', Master of Business Administration, No 4, pp.22-28.
Houston, D.J. (2000), 'Public service motivation: a multivariate test', Journal of Public
Administration Research and Theory, Vol 10, No 4, pp.713-27.
Johnson, N. (1985), 'Change in the civil service: retrospect and prospects', Public
Administration, Vol 63, No 4, pp.415-33.
Knill, C. (1999), 'Explaining Cross-National Variance in Administrative Reform:
Autonomous versus Instrumental Bureaucracies', Journal of Public Policy, Vol 19,
No 2, pp.113-39.
Kugele, D. (1978), Der Politische Beamte. Entwicklung, Bewdhrung und Reform einer
Politisch Administrativen Institution, (Muinchen: Tuduv-Verlagsgesellschaft).
Konig, K. (1997), Zur Kritik Eines Neuen Offentlichen Managements, (Speyer:
Forschungsinstitut fur offentliche Verwaltung).
Konig, K. (2003), 'On the Typology of Public Administration', International Review of
Administrative Sciences, Vol 69, No 4, pp.449-62.

Public Policy and Administration Volume 21 No. 1 Spring 2006 29

 Konig, K. and Siedentopf, H. (2001), Public Administration in Germany, (Baden
Baden: Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft).
Lewis, G.B. and Alonso, P. (2001), 'Public service motivation and job performance -
Evidence from the federal sector', American Review of Public Administration,
Vol 31, No 4, pp.363-80.
Lewis, G.B. and Frank, S.A. (2002), 'Who wants to work for government?' Public
Administration Review, Vol 62, No 4, pp.395-404.
Livingstone, H. and Wilkie, R. (1981), 'Motivation and performance among civil
service managers', Public Administration, Vol 59, No 2, pp. 151-72.
Loffler, E., Busse, B. and Hoppe, U. (2002), 'Modest Beginnings for Competency
Management in German Public Services. Developing Competencies for already
Competent Lawyers?', in Horton, S., Hondeghem, A. and Farnham, D. (eds),
Competency Management in the Public Sector European Variations on a Theme,
(IIAS-EGPA), pp.105-21.
Mae Kelly, R. (1998), 'An inclusive democratic polity, representative bureaucracies and
the new public management', Public Administration Review, Vol 58, No 3, pp.201-08.
March, J.G. and Olsen, J.P. (1989), Rediscovering Institutions, (New York: The Free
Press).
Mayntz, R. and Derlien, H.-U. (1989), 'Party Patronage and Politicization of the West
German Administrative Elite 1970-1987 - Toward Hybridization?' Governance,
Vol 2, pp.384-404.
Meyer, Renate and Hammerschmid, Gerhard (2005), 'Changing institutional logics and
its impact on social identities - a survey of Austrian public sector executives', paper
presented at the EGPA Conference, Berne.
Naff, K.C. and Crum, J. (1999), 'Working for America- does public service motivation
make a difference', Review of Public Personnel Administration, Vol 19, No 4, pp.5-16.
Norris, P. (2003), 'Is there still a public service ethos? Work values, experience, and job
satisfaction among government workers', in Donahue, J.D. and Nye, J.S. Jr. (ed.),
For the People - Can We Fix Public Service, (Washington DC: Brookings Institution
Press).
O'Toole, B.J. (1997), 'The concept of public duty', in Barberis, P. (ed.), The Civil
Service in an Era of Change, (Aldershot: Dartmouth), pp.82-94.
O'Toole, B.J. (1998), 'We walk by faith, not by sight: the ethic of public service', in
Michael, H. and O'Toole, B.J. (eds), Reform, Ethics and Leadership in Public Service
-A Festschrift in Honour ofRichard A. Chapman, (Aldershot: Ashgate), pp.84-102.
O'Toole, B.J. (2000), 'The public interest: a political and administrative convenience?',
in Chapman, R.A. (ed.), Ethics in Public Service for the New Millennium,
(Aldershot: Ashgate), pp.71-91.
Parris, H. (1969), Constitutional Bureaucracy, (London: Allen and Unwin).
Perry, J. and Wise, L.R. (1990), 'The motivational bases of public service', Public
Administration Review, Vol 50, No 3, pp.367-73.
Perry, J.L. (1996), 'Measuring public service motivation: an assessment of construct
reliability and validity', Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory,
Vol 6, No 1, pp.5-23.
Perry, J.L. (1997), 'Antecedents of public service motivation', Journal of Public
Administration Research and Theory, Vol 7, No 2, pp.181-97.
Perry, J.L. (2000), 'Bringing society in: toward a theory of public service motivation',
Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, Vol 10, No 2, pp.471-88.
Peters, B.G. (2000), Institutional Theory in Political Science: The New Institutionalism,
(London: Continuum).

30 Public Policy and Administration Volume 21 No. 1 Spring 2006

Pratchett, L. and Wingfield, M. (1996), 'Petty bureaucracy and woolly-minded
liberalism? The changing ethos of local government officers', Public
Administration, Vol 74, No 4, pp.639-56.
Rainey, H.G. and Steinbauer, P. (1999), 'Galloping elephants: developing elements of
a theory of effective government organizations', Journal of Public Administration
Research and Theory, Vol 9, No 1, pp.1-32.
Richards, D. and Smith, M.J. (1998), 'The gatekeepers of the common good - power
and the public service ethos', in Hondeghem, A. (ed.), Ethics & Accountability in a
Context of Governance & New Public Management, (Amsterdam: IOS), pp.151-63.
Richards, D. and Smith, M.J. (2004), 'The hybrid state: Labour's response to the
challenge of government', in Ludlam, S. and Smith, M.J. (eds), Governing as New
Labour - Policy and Politics under Blair, (Basingstoke: Palgrave).
Scott, W.R. (2001), Institutions and Organizations, (Thousand Oaks: Sage).
Strohm, N. (2001), Why Germany does not (yet?) have a Nolan Committee, (Institut fur
Politikwissenschaft, Fern Universitat-Gesamthochschule - Hagen).
Studlar, D.T. (1996), Great Britain - Decline or Renewal, (Boulder: Westview Press).
Theakston, K. (1995), The Civil Service Since 1945, (Oxford: Blackwell).
Vandenabeele, W. and Hondeghem, A. (2004), 'L'appel de la fonction publique: la
'motivation de service public' en tant que facteur decisif d'engagement dans la
fonction publique, a l'ere de la nouvelle gestion publique', Revue Economique et
Sociale, Vol 62, No 4, pp.91-102.
Vandenabeele, W. and Hondeghem, A. (2005), 'Valeurs et motivation dans
l'administration publique', Revue Francaise d'Administration Publique, Vol 115,
pp.463-80.
von Wersebe, H. (1986), Struktureller und Funktionaler Pluralismus in der
Offentlichen Verwaltung, (Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang).
Winstone, R. (2003), Research Paper 03/49: Wither the civil service? (London: House
of Common Library).
Wollmann, H. and Schroter, E. (2000), Comparing Public Sector Reform in Britain and
Germany, (Aldershot: Ashgate).
Woodhouse, D. (1997), In Pursuit of Good Administration - Ministers, Civil Servants
and Judges, (Oxford: Clarendon Press).
Yin, R.K. (1981), 'The case study crisis: some answers', Administrative Science
Quarterly, Vol 26, pp.58-65.

Public Policy and Administration Volume 21 No. 1 Spring 2006 31