Acceso usuarios
Mark A. Covaleski, Mark W. Dirsmith, Jane M. Weiss
Our historically-informed field study focuses upon the socio-political processes by which heterogeneous budgeting compromises are reached by a variety of contending parties in seeking and resisting fundamental change, as well as the consequences of those compromises within the State of Wisconsin�s transformative Welfare Works (W-2) Program. Despite the continuing political rhetoric of comprehensive changes in the manner in which budgets are formulated, and, more broadly, the welfare system through adoption of a �market-based delivery system� and �performance-based contracts,� we find that the adopted and transformed regulation and budgeting regime facilitated more incremental changes in welfare delivery. Our field observations identify the manner in which budgeting facilitated this shift from a comprehensive to incremental strategy in terms of: (1) the malleable nature of budgeting, which provided the needed organizational flexibility to shift resources from one application to another in an ostensibly rational manner, thereby ensuring the legitimacy of the emerging organizational arrangements and related dramatic budget cuts under W-2; and (2) the active role played by institutional entrepreneurs in the construction, challenge and deployment of budgets in shaping, and thereby endogenizing welfare reform regulations at both the federal and state level. Refining our theoretical line of reasoning, field observations suggest that W-2 and the social context to which it was applied were mutually endogenous rather than fully endogenous, and that the principal actors implicated in the change process may be more aptly described as cultural entrepreneurs rather than institutional entrepreneurs; they also suggest that the forms endogenization and entrepreneurship take are reciprocally interdependent such that the manner in which each plays out conditions the other. Implications are explored.
