Comparative Analysis of Public Service Motivation Across Local Governments

Thesis Abstract

Public service motivation (PSM) is a key driver of employee commitment and performance in public sector organizations, yet comparative evidence across local governments remains fragmented and contextually sensitive. The study addresses the problem of limited understanding of how structural, cultural, and institutional differences among local governments influence PSM and its components—attraction to public service, commitment to public interest, compassion, and self-sacrificing values—across diverse urban, suburban, and rural settings. The aim is to elucidate how PSM varies across local governments and identify contextual determinants that shape its expression, with particular attention to local governance structures, fiscal autonomy, and citizen-centric service delivery cultures. Specific objectives are to (i) measure levels of PSM and its sub-dimensions among public employees in a stratified sample of local governments; (ii) examine the association between organizational characteristics (leadership style, performance management, employee voice mechanisms) and PSM; (iii) assess the moderating role of service delivery context (urbanization, demographic composition, and local fiscal health) on PSM; (iv) evaluate the relationship between PSM and outcome variables such as job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and perceived public value; and (v) generate policy recommendations to foster PSM across local government jurisdictions. A mixed-methods design is employed to capture both breadth and depth. The quantitative strand uses a cross-sectional survey administered to 1,200 public service employees drawn from 12 local governments representing metropolitan, suburban, and rural contexts, with proportional stratification by department and tenure. The survey instrument integrates validated scales for PSM (e.g., Perry’s PSM scale and its sub-dimensions), job satisfaction, and organizational commitment, supplemented by items capturing leadership style, transparency, and performance feedback mechanisms. Quantitative data will be analyzed using multivariate regression, hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) to account for nested data structures (employees within local governments), and structural equation modeling (SEM) to test the measurement and structural relationships among PSM, organizational factors, and outcomes. The qualitative strand consists of 40 in-depth interviews with senior administrators and frontline employees across the sampled governments, complemented by 20 focus group discussions with mid-level managers. Thematic analysis will identify contextual factors, meanings attached to public service, and perceptions of governance arrangements that shape PSM. Triangulation will be achieved through integration of survey results with qualitative insights. Key expected findings include (1) substantive differences in PSM levels across local government types, with higher PSM in organizations characterized by participatory leadership, strong public value orientation, and transparent performance feedback; (2) a positive association between supportive leadership, meaningful public mission framing, and higher PSM, controlling for demographics; (3) significant moderating effects of service delivery context, whereby urban governments with complex stakeholder networks exhibit distinct PSM profiles compared with rural counterparts; (4) a robust positive link between PSM and job satisfaction and organizational commitment, mediated by perceived alignment with public values; and (5) evidence that organizational practices fostering citizen-centric service and ethical governance strengthen PSM durability over time. The study will contribute to knowledge by clarifying the contextualized nature of PSM across local governments and by integrating quantitative and qualitative insights to illuminate mechanisms linking governance structure to public service motivation. It will advance theory by testing and extending Perry’s PSM framework within a cross-jurisdictional setting and by incorporating organizational context as a central moderator. Policy implications include actionable guidance for local governments on leadership development, performance management design, and governance reforms that cultivate PSM, thereby enhancing employee engagement and service quality. The main conclusion is that PSM is not uniform across local governments but is shaped by leadership practices, governance arrangements, and the local context; recommendations emphasize adaptive strategies that nurture public values, transparent accountability, and inclusive decision-making to sustain high levels of public service motivation.