Beyond Simplification in Public Sector Accountability: Contradictions Between Principal‐Agent and Complexity Theories

ABSTRACT This conceptual study explores the complexity of public sector accountability, traditionally framed by principal‐agent theory (PAT), which simplifies relationships through rigid contracts. The findings reveal how PAT's assumptions often misalign with the intricate realities of public sector accountability, which are better explained by complexity theories (CT). Contradictions between PAT and CT assumptions are highlighted, underlining the need for more flexible and dynamic accountability frameworks. The study calls for further research to refine the concept of complexity‐based accountability and investigate tensions between practical accountability applications of PAT and CT. Such research could transform public administration practice and scholarship by better accommodating the complex realities of managing public services.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Public Administration Review
Published
2025-02-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13941
Citations
10
Primary Topic
Public Policy and Administration Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
36.56

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Beyond Simplification in Public Sector Accountability: Contradictions Between Principal‐Agent and Complexity Theories

Tomi Rajala, Harri Jalonen
10 citations
Public Administration Review
Public Policy and Administration Research
36.56
article

Beyond Simplification in Public Sector Accountability: Contradictions Between Principal‐Agent and Complexity Theories

Tomi Rajala, Harri Jalonen
article en
10 citations

Abstract

ABSTRACT This conceptual study explores the complexity of public sector accountability, traditionally framed by principal‐agent theory (PAT), which simplifies relationships through rigid contracts. The findings reveal how PAT's assumptions often misalign with the intricate realities of public sector accountability, which are better explained by complexity theories (CT). Contradictions between PAT and CT assumptions are highlighted, underlining the need for more flexible and dynamic accountability frameworks. The study calls for further research to refine the concept of complexity‐based accountability and investigate tensions between practical accountability applications of PAT and CT. Such research could transform public administration practice and scholarship by better accommodating the complex realities of managing public services.

Public Administration ReviewVol. 85(6)
University of Vaasa (FI), Norwegian School of Economics (NO)
Academy of Finland, Strategic Research Council
Openalex Percentile: Top 0%
Public Policy and Administration Research
36.56
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Beyond Simplification in Public Sector Accountability: Contradictions Between Principal‐Agent and Complexity Theories — Tomi Rajala, Harri Jalonen · Public Administration Review (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS