MANAGERIALISM AS A PROFESSIONALISING CATALYST FOR THE FRONT-LINE PRACTITIONER COMMUNITY OF NEW ZEALAND’S DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION _________________________________________ A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Applied Science at Lincoln University by Euan S Kennedy __________________________________________ Lincoln University 2003 Abstract of a thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Master in Applied Science, Lincoln University, New Zealand. MANAGERIALISM AS A PROFESSIONALISING CATALYST FOR THE FRONT-LINE PRACTITIONER COMMUNITY OF NEW ZEALAND’S DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION Euan S Kennedy ABSTRACT Since 1984, public service occupations in New Zealand have been subordinated to the over-determined bureaucratic structures of contemporary managerialism. The reac- tions of front-line public servants to New Management’s unfamiliar ‘market-place’ im- peratives and the concomitant loss of occupational autonomy have received very little rigorous qualitative analysis. This study addresses that shortfall, taking as its cue a key question in the sociology of ‘profession’—what arouses or subdues the inclination of bureaucratised occupations to professionalise as a means of reclaiming autonomy? It explains the nature and meaning of strategies adopted by front-line practitioners in New Zealand’s Department of Conservation (DOC) to defend their marginalised work conventions and collegial culture. Symbolic interactionist analysis shows that pro- foundly personal values and beliefs connect vocationally motivated practitioners with their ‘mission’ (to conserve natural and cultural heritage). These powerful intuitive connections play a crucial role in subduing interest in resistance and organised stra- tegic action, principally by converting conservation labour into the pursuit of personal fulfilment. Practitioners respond to managerial intrusions on their core work (the source of their fulfilment) by defending these personal connections rather than group interests. As a result of this introversion, perceptions of ‘community’ and occupational identity are disorganised and become a further reason for inaction. Practitioners re- solve the conflict between self-interested pursuit of fulfilment and the altruistic goals of conservation by negotiating an unspoken bargain with DOC’s authority structures. The ‘pay-offs’ for deferral to managerial authority win the space to pursue fulfilment through immersion and conspicuous achievement in work, obviating the need for more concerted defensive action. Accordingly, managerialism has not acted as a pro- fessionalising catalyst for this group. KEY WORDS: autonomy, beliefs, closure, collegiality, community, conservation, eco- nomic rationalism, front-line practitioner, identity, symbolic interactionism, manageri- alism, mission, occupation, professionalisation, values, vocation, work. i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS During this project, I am privileged to have been supported by good friends, family and colleagues. Without them, this project would not have come about at all, or have been completed. Bob Gidlow willingly undertook to supervise me, believing, I suspect, that this might be one of the quicker ones. His patience was tried sorely, I’m afraid, but if his uplifting confidence in my ability ever faltered, he was compassionate en- ough not to show it. I owe Dr Pat Devlin gratitude in equal quantities for his guidance and encouragement. His familiarity with the world of conservation and its practitioners kept me honest on numerous occasions. I apologise to you both for the long droughts and high floods, but I hope that this work has done justice to your interests and intellects. And to Professor Harvey Perkins (sav- iour of errant ecologists’ souls), my thanks also. Were it not for the hours passed in the car, the mai mai and at dinner, debating conservation’s obliga- tions to humans, I doubt that I would ever have come to rummage in the social science toolbox. Mind you, I’m not convinced yet that you’re right. My gratitude also to Douglas Broughton, Evert Kampert and Bernadette Mani for guidance with funding, equipment and administration at Lincoln. I am indebted to Lesley Hunt who read chapter drafts for me, and to Michael Hamblett who generously agreed to proof-read my final draft. This research was made possible by Mike Cuddihy, Conservator, Canterbury, who has been very generous in the DOC time and resources he allowed me to use. His confidence in social research as a conservation tool has been less of a gamble, I believe, than allowing me “of all people” to study the human dimen- sions of DOC. I hope that my work has not injured this trust, despite its subject matter. In DOC also, I am grateful to Andrew Squires, Bernard Timings and Mike Massaar who were obliging in providing demographic data and other information, and to Steve Tully who helped with funding assistance for my course of study. ii And of course, to my practitioner colleagues who participated in this research, my profound appreciation for your insights, honesty, trust and good-humour, even when you were wondering what on Earth it was that I was trying to do. Thank you also to my many other colleagues who collected material for me, commented constructively on my ideas, read drafts and assured me that this project had something important to say. I hope that I have given few of you cause to say, “But that’s not how I feel.” Finally, my lasting gratitude to Kate, my wife and friend, who has carried the family and financial burdens of this study along with her own workload. It has been hard at times, but it feels great to give you back your evenings and week- ends. To my patient daughters Mirrin and Briar, I’m back! Let’s go camping. * This research and preparatory course work has been supported by a Lincoln University Graduate Scholarship, and funding from the Environment, Society & Design Division of Lincoln University. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract i Acknowledgements ii Table of Contents iv List of Figures ix List of Tables x Chapter One—Introduction 1 1.0 Research overview 1 1.1 Research subjects 2 1.2 Research interests 3 1.2.1 Social effects of managerialism and ‘New Right’ reform 4 1.2.2 Professionalising triggers 5 1.2.3 Theoretical approach 6 1.2.4 Specific research focus 8 1.3 Personal research agenda 9 1.3.1 Previous studies 10 1.4 Assumptions tested by this study 11 1.5 Organisation of the thesis 13 Chapter Two—Research Goals, Methods And Terminology 15 2.0 Overview 15 2.1 Research goals 15 2.1.1 GOAL ONE–Managerialism as a professionalising catalyst 15 2.1.2 GOAL TWO–Intrinsic and extrinsic influences on the choice to professionalise 16 2.2 Research methodology 17 2.2.1 Workplace observations 18 2.2.2 Interviews 19 2.2.3 Selection of research subjects 20 2.2.4 Supporting data 20 2.2.5 Data analysis 21 2.2.6 Countering selection bias 22 2.3 Terminology 22 iv Chapter Three—Social And Theoretical Contexts 25 3.0 Overview 25 3: Part One—The Sociology Of Profession 26 3.1 Introduction 26 3.1.1 A brief historical overview of professions 26 3.1.2 Defining profession 27 3.1.3 The taxonomy of profession 28 3.1.4 Problems with the attribute approach 29 3.1.5 The power paradigm 31 3.1.6 Problems with process-based definition 33 3.1.7 Interactionist approaches 34 3.1.8 Interactionism and occupational ‘power’ 37 3.1.9 Merits of interactionist method for this study 38 3.1.10 The fate of expert occupations in complex organisations 38 3.1.11 ‘Collegiality’ and ‘community’ 42 3.1.12 Summary 45 3: Part Two—Managerialism 47 3.2 Introduction 47 3.2.1 What is managerialism? 47 3.2.2 Managerialism in New Zealand’s public sector 49 3.2.3 Relevant reform objectives 50 3.2.4 Role of managers 52 3.2.5 Implications for public sector practitioners 53 3.2.5.1 Disconnected approaches to work 56 3.2.5.2 Commodifying of service and production effort 56 3.2.5.3 Distorted service relationships 57 3.2.5.4 Cost recovery impacts on workloads and effectiveness 58 3.2.5.5 Rationing and neglect of need 58 3.2.5.6 Individualistic controls on practitioners 58 3.2.5.7 De-skilling 59 3.2.6 Professions as models 59 3.2.7 Summary: Implications for professionalising action 61 v Chapter Four—Who Are DOC’s Front-Line Practitioners? 63 4.0 Overview 63 4: Part One—The Front-Line Practitioner Group 65 4.1 Introduction 65 4.1.1 Group parameters inside DOC 65 4.1.2 Technical disciplines 66 4.1.3 Group demography 67 4.1.3.1 Gender 69 4.1.3.2 Age 69 4.1.3.3 Ethnicity 70 4.1.3.4 Salary 71 4.1.3.5 Qualifications 72 4.1.3.6 Internal learning 73 4.1.4 The nature of practitioner work and knowledge 73 4.1.5 Work frontiers 74 4.1.6 Legal, political and social mandates 76 4.1.7 Origins of the group and occupation 78 4.1.7.1 Orphans of structural reform 78 4.1.7.2 The ‘ranger’ tradition 80 4.1.8 Summary 83 4: Part Two—Managerialism In The Workplace 85 4.2 Introduction 85 4.2.1 Organisational framework 86 4.2.2 Organisational principles 88 4.2.3 Accountability 88 4.2.3.1 Accountability and cohesion 89 4.2.3.2 Accountability and coercion 91 4.2.4 Managerial leadership 92 4.2.4.1 Structural implications of managerial leadership 95 4.2.5 Role and functional clarity 95 4.2.5.1 Practitioner deployment 96 4.2.5.2 Work modes, roles and levels 97 4.2.5.3 Working relationships and interactions 99 4.2.6 Summary: Occupational implications of managerialism 100 vi Chapter Five—Who Do DOC’s Front-line Practitioners Think They Are? 104 5.0 Overview 104 5: Part one—‘Community’ Values 106 5.1 Introduction 106 5.1.1 Preamble: keeping