[雙語(yǔ)翻譯]公共管理外文翻譯--非營(yíng)利社區(qū)服務(wù)中的政府資助、就業(yè)條件和工作組織一項(xiàng)比較研究

1、7900 英文單詞， 英文單詞，4.5 萬(wàn)英文字符，中文 萬(wàn)英文字符，中文 1.4 萬(wàn)字 萬(wàn)字文獻(xiàn)出處 文獻(xiàn)出處:Cunningham I , Baines D , Charlesworth S . Government funding, employment conditions, and work organization in non-profit community services: A comparative study[J

2、]. Public Administration, 2014, 92(3):582–598.GOVERNMENT FUNDING, EMPLOYMENT CONDITIONS, AND WORK ORGANIZATION IN NON-PROFIT COMMUNITY SERVICES: A COMPARATIVE STUDYIAN CUNNINGHAM, DONNA BAINES AND SARA CHARLESWORTHThe ar

3、ticle provides a comparative exploration of New Public Management (NPM) funding models on the non-profit sectors in the UK and Australia, and the implications for services, employment conditions, and worker commitment. A

4、 degree of convergence exists around the principles of NPM in the two case studies, creating employment regimes of low pay, casualization, and work intensification. Enhanced vulnerability to pay cuts in the UK, and insec

5、urity in Australia are explained by national differences in exposure to recession, industrial relations institutions, and competition, leading to diminishing worker commitment and raising important concerns for policy-ma

6、kers as benefits gained from outsourcing to non-profits are eroded.INTRODUCTIONThe impact of New Public Management (NPM) on employment conditions for those employed in public service delivery has varied across nation sta

7、tes (Diefenbach 2009; Bach and Bordogna 2011). NPM has also involved the outsourcing of public services to non-profit organizations. In such circumstances, it is felt that the full effects of NPM and its cost-cutting ten

8、dencies and concerns over working conditions will be most pronounced, and subject to less variability. This is because the further workers are from the source of the outsourcing process, the greater the likelihood that t

9、hey will experience degradations in their working conditions (Flecker et al. 2009). This is potentially problematic as non- profit workers can become disenchanted when their employment conditions are reduced (Cunningham

10、2008), or perhaps just as importantly when their commitment to making a difference is frustrated by perceptions that NPM-inspired government funding models fail to fully recognize and address the needs of clients (Thomps

11、on and Bunderson 2004).Most work exploring the impact of NPM on non-profit workers is country specific (Baines 2004a; Cunningham 2008), with few international comparative studies. This article begins to meet this gap thr

12、ough drawing from a qualitative study of two non-profit organizations in Australia and the UK. The article explores three questions:1. How do NPM-influenced government regulations and funding mechanisms shape relations w

13、ith non-profit organizations providing public services?2. What are the implications from these regulatory and funding pressures for terms and conditions of employment, work organization, and service provision in non-prof

14、it social service organizations?3. What impact do these implications have on management–employee relations and worker orientations?Data indicate converging NPM pressures, but also other factors influencing pay, working c

15、onditions, and services across the two organizations, and growing intolerance among workers, suggesting instability and threats to service quality in NPM-inspired systems of social service Braithwaite et al.’s (2007) stu

16、dy of aged care and has been taken up in the Australian health and community services sectors by Kaine (2009) and Charlesworth (2012).This article focuses on the regulatory mechanism of the market created through the con

17、tracting out under NPM. It regulates through setting the price for the services tendered for, which in turn imposes a distinct set of constraints on individual and collective behaviour (Lessig 1998). These constraints ar

18、e anticipated to have detrimental effects on employment in non-profits, including: pay and conditions; job insecurity because of the proliferation of short-term contracts and competition; work intensification brought on

19、through demands from funders for more or the same level of services with fewer resources; and possible deleterious effects on employee commitment.To further explore the impact of these market relations on employment, lab

20、our process scholarship provides useful insights, particularly the impact of lean work organization on work intensification, flexibility, and increased demands for documentation. Such an analysis of the impact of funding

21、 structures on work organization and workers’ conditions has been documented in a number of Canadian and British studies (Evans and Shields 2002; Baines 2004a, 2004b; Cunningham 2008; Aronson and Smith 2010) but has been

22、 less explored in a cross-national perspective. Added to this scrutiny of the labour process is a concern to explore beyond NPM’s narrow prescription of ‘good’ care to understandings of such work that are based on relati

23、onships between carers and service users (Atkinson and Lucas 2013).The Straussian concept of ‘a(chǎn)rticulation work’ (see Junor et al. 2008) is useful, for example, in revealing tasks representing the hidden ‘glue’ undertake

24、n in non-profit services. This concept embraces work beyond the one-off ‘transactions’ on which analysts of interactive front-line work focus. Articulation work involves attending and sequencing simultaneously to a range

25、 of different competing demands, responding to contingencies, and working around obstacles. It involves negotiating relationships within and across authority lines, organizational boundaries, and cultural groups, interwe

26、aving team members’ own activities into overall work-flow, and keeping work processes on track. Such work is integral to the labour process in social services, yet remains substantially unrecognized in funding models and

27、 outcome measures and forms a key part of structures of work intensification in the sector (Kosny and MacEachen 2010).These effects are mediated by other factors, however. Within such inter-organizational relations, for

28、example, power relations between parties ebb and flow, altering their ‘negotiated order’ (Truss 2004). Non-profit organizations avoid complete subjugation to government institutional and cost pressures through operating

29、in niche markets, having a diversity of funders across a wide geographic area and engaging in partnership relations (Cunningham 2008). Such market positions can change, however, as funders embark on further waves of rest

30、ructuring or change priorities (Cunningham and James 2011), an emerging example being the individualization/personalization of care which shares characteristics of NPM, such as ‘choice’, power to the user, and lower cost

31、s (Needham 2011). Restructuring can also arise through factors not directly related to NPM such as national differences in vulnerability to the recent economic crisis and subsequent austerity in public expenditure.Change

32、s to employment in non-profit organizations under NPM are also uneven because they are contested and a focus of workers’ organization and struggle (Ackroyd et al. 2004; O’Donnell et al. 2011). Thus recognition of the rol