The impact of organizational resilience on the quality of public services: Application of structural equation modeling

Abstract

Research background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, public sector entities encountered extraordinary difficulties in maintaining the delivery of public services. They were ill-equipped to operate in the unpredictable circumstances of the pandemic, causing a significant impact on the accessibility and quality of public services. This scenario also highlighted the importance of the resilience of the public sector, which entails an organization's capacity to function in a crisis setting and uncover opportunities that might not have been evident during normal circumstances.

Purpose of the article: This study aims to assess development trends within public sector resilience and their impact on the quality of public services. As resilience is realized through a three-phase prism - i.e., Planning, Adaptation, and Enhanced Learning - we hypothesize that Adaptation is endogenously interrelated with Planning and positively affects Enhanced Learning, which in turn positively impacts Service Quality.

Methods: Two successive surveys were carried out to examine the links between organizational resilience and Service Quality in the public sector. The first involved interviewing 401 senior managers of the organizations that provide public services in Lithuania to assess their level of organizational resilience. The second survey involved questioning individuals aged 18 and above who had used the services of the previously surveyed organizations. In total, 3,609 public service users were interviewed to gather data on Service Quality. Structural equation modeling was performed to analyze the data collected.

Findings & value added: The results of structural equation modeling revealed that Enhanced Learning positively and significantly affects Service Quality. The findings of this study suggest that the bounce-back stage of organizational resilience, i.e., Adaptation, indirectly affects Service Quality through the bounce-forward stage, i.e., Enhanced Learning. Thus, Enhanced Learning acts both as an accelerator of Service Quality and as a moderator of the effect that other stages of organizational resilience have on Service Quality. The primary contribution of this article is its discovery that Service Quality develops from Enhanced Learning, implying that the optimal approach to service provision is based on both newly acquired knowledge and experience gained during challenging times. This enables organizations to transform their service delivery in response to the realities of changing circumstances, thereby creating opportunities to prepare for future challenges from the standpoint of a new equilibrium.

Keywords

organizational resilience, public service, impact assessment, structural equation modeling

References

1. Adobor, H., Darbi, W. P. K., & Damoah, O. B. O. (2021). Strategy in the era of "swans": The role of strategic leadership under uncertainty and unpredictabil-ity. Journal of Strategy and Management. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1108/ JSMA-09-2020-0242. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JSMA-09-2020-0242
   View in Google Scholar
2. Anggadwita, G., Permatasari, A., Alamanda, D. T., & Profityo, W. B. (2022). Ex-ploring women's initiatives for family business resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Family Business Management. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1108/JFBM-02-2022-0014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JFBM-02-2022-0014
   View in Google Scholar
3. Aragao, J., & Fontana, M. (2022). Outsourcing strategies in public services under budgetary constraints: Analysing perceptions of public managers. Public Organization Review, 22(1), 61–77. doi: 10.1007/s11115-021-00517-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11115-021-00517-5
   View in Google Scholar
4. Arsawan, I. W. E., Koval, V., Suhartanto, D., Harbar, Z., & Maslennikov, Y. (2022). Employee-driven innovation capability: The role of knowledge, creativity, and time sufficiency. Intellectual Economics, 16(2), 138–165. doi: 10.13165/IE-22-16-2-08. DOI: https://doi.org/10.13165/IE-22-16-2-08
   View in Google Scholar
5. Bartuseviciene, I., Rakauskiene, O., & Valackiene, A. (2023). Assessing the resili-ence of organizations in the context of uncertainty. Measuring Business Excel-lence, 27(2), 211–226. doi: 10.1108/MBE-05-2022-0066. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/MBE-05-2022-0066
   View in Google Scholar
6. Bright, L. (2021). Does person organization fit and person-job fit mediate the rela-tionship between public service motivation and work stress among U.S. feder-al employees? Administrative Sciences, 11(2), 37. doi: 10.3390/admsci11020037. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci11020037
   View in Google Scholar
7. Brykman, K. M., & King, D. D. (2021). A resource model of team resilience capaci-ty and learning. Group & Organization Management, 46(4), 737–772. doi: 10.1177/10 596011211018008. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/10596011211018008
   View in Google Scholar
8. Butkus, M., Rakauskiene, O. G., Bartuseviciene, I., Stasiukynas, A., Volodzkiene, L., & Dargenyte-Kacileviciene, L. (2023). Measuring quality perception of pub-lic services: Customer-oriented approach. Engineering Management in Production and Services, 15(2), 96–117. doi: 10.2478/emj-2023-0016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/emj-2023-0015
   View in Google Scholar
9. Chang, J. S., Jung, D., Jun, S., & Oh, H. (2020). Resilience conceptual framework for assessing the performance of transit service. International Journal of Urban Sciences, 24(3), 339–353. doi: 10.1080/12265934.2019.1687319. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/12265934.2019.1687319
   View in Google Scholar
10. Chui, C. H. (2022). Opportunities for organizational learning and innovation: A nonprofit case study during COVID‐19 in Hong Kong. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 33(2), 441–452. doi: 10.1002/nml.21528. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.21528
    View in Google Scholar
11. Clement, S., Moore, S., Lockwood, M., & Mitchell, M. (2015). Using insights from pragmatism to develop reforms that strengthen institutional competence for conserving biodiversity. Policy Sciences, 48(4), 463–489. doi: 10.1007/s11077-015-9222-0. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-015-9222-0
    View in Google Scholar
12. Darkow, P. M. (2019). Beyond "bouncing back": Towards an integral, capability-based understanding of organizational resilience. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 27(2), 145–156. doi: 10.1111/1468-5973.12246. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5973.12246
    View in Google Scholar
13. Du, J., Peng, Y., Tong, Y., & Bilan, Y. (2022). Impact of enterprise ambidexterity capability and experience learning on cross-border M&A performance: evi-dence from China. Oeconomia Copernicana, 13(4), 1177–1214. doi: 10.24136/oc.2022.034. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24136/oc.2022.034
    View in Google Scholar
14. Duit, A. (2016). Resilience thinking: Lessons for public administration. Public Administration, 94(2), 364–380. doi: 10.1111/padm.12182. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12182
    View in Google Scholar
15. Ebrahimi, S., & Bridgelall, R. (2021). A fuzzy Delphi analytic hierarchy model to rank factors influencing public transit mode choice: a case study. Research in Transportation Business & Management, 39, 100496. doi: 10.1016/j.rtbm.2020.100 496. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rtbm.2020.100496
    View in Google Scholar
16. Elston, T., & Bel, G. (2023). Does inter-municipal collaboration improve public service resilience? Evidence from local authorities in England. Public Manage-ment Review, 25(4), 734–761. doi: 10.1080/14719037.2021.2012377. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2021.2012377
    View in Google Scholar
17. Fehrer, J. A., & Bove, L. L. (2022). Viewpoint: Shaping resilient service ecosystems in times of crises – a trans-Tasman perspective. Journal of Services Marketing, 36(4), 489–498. doi: 10.1108/JSM-06-2021-0216. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JSM-06-2021-0216
    View in Google Scholar
18. Fischer, C., Siegel, J., Proeller, I., & Drathschmidt, N. (2023). Resilience through digitalisation: How individual and organisational resources affect public em-ployees working from home during the COVID-19 pandemic. Public Management Review, 25(4), 808–835. doi: 10.1080/14719037.2022.2037014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2022.2037014
    View in Google Scholar
19. Gonçalves, L., Navarro, J. B., & Sala, R. (2019). Spanish validation of the bench-mark resilience tool (short-form version) to evaluate organisational resilience. Safety Science, 111, 94–101. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2018.09.015 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2018.09.015
    View in Google Scholar
20. Gu, W. (2023). Impact of managers' overconfidence upon listed firms' entrepre-neurial behavior in an emerging market. Journal of Business Research, 155(Part B), 113453. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.113453. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.113453
    View in Google Scholar
21. Herrero, M., & Kraemer, S. (2022). Beyond survival mode: Organizational resili-ence capabilities in nonprofit arts and culture fundraising during the COVID-19 pandemic. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 33(2), 279–295. doi: 10.1002/nml. 21524. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.21524
    View in Google Scholar
22. Hoegl, M., & Hartmann, S. (2021). Bouncing back, if not beyond: Challenges for research on resilience. Asian Business & Management, 20(4), 456–464. doi: 10.1057 /s41291-020-00133-z. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41291-020-00133-z
    View in Google Scholar
23. Kallias, A., Kallias, K., Tsalkamas, I., & Zhang, S. (2023). One size does not fit all: The conditional role of CEO education on IPO performance. Journal of Business Research, 157, 113560. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.113560. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.113560
    View in Google Scholar
24. Kirsop-Taylor, N. (2022). Leaping forwards, bouncing forwards, or just bouncing back: Resilience in environmental public agencies through after the austerity decade. Environmental Management, 70(5), 697–709. doi: 10.1007/s00267-022-01701-z. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-022-01701-z
    View in Google Scholar
25. Leite, H., & Hodgkinson, I. R. (2021). Examining resilience across a service ecosys-tem under crisis. Public Management Review, 25(4), 690–709. doi: 10.1080/14719 037.2021.2012375. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2021.2012375
    View in Google Scholar
26. Lund, C. S., & Andersen, L. B. (2022). Professional development leadership in turbulent times. Public Administration, 101(1), 124–141. doi: 10.1111/padm.12854. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12854
    View in Google Scholar
27. MacLean, D., & Titah, R. (2022). A systematic literature review of empirical re-search on the impacts of e-government: A public value perspective. Public Administration Review, 82(1), 23–38. doi: 10.1111/puar.13413. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13413
    View in Google Scholar
28. Mardaras, E., Artola, G., Duarte, S., & Otegi-Olaso, J. R. (2021). Antifragile philos-ophy in R&D projects: Applying Q Methodology and the possibility of open innovation. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 7(4), 209. doi: 10.3390/joitmc7040209. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc7040209
    View in Google Scholar
29. Mazzucato, M., & Kattel, R. (2020). COVID-19 and public-sector capacity. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 36, 256–269. doi: 10.1093/oxrep/graa031. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/graa031
    View in Google Scholar
30. Mithani, M. A., Gopalakrishnan, S., & Santoro, M. D. (2021). Does exposure to a traumatic event make organizations resilient? Long Range Planning, 54(3), 102031. doi: 10.1016/j.lrp.2020.102031. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2020.102031
    View in Google Scholar
31. Näswall, K., Malinen, S., Kuntz, J., & Hodliffe, M. (2019). Employee resilience: Development and validation of a measure. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 34(5), 353–367. doi: 10.1108/JMP-02-2018-0102. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-02-2018-0102
    View in Google Scholar
32. OECD (2021). Public employment and management 2021: The future of the public service. OECD. doi: 10.1787/938f0d65-en DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/938f0d65-en
    View in Google Scholar
33. Orth, D., & Schuldis, P. M. (2021). Organizational learning and unlearning capa-bilities for resilience during COVID-19. Learning Organization, 28(6), 509–522. doi: 10.1108/TLO-07-2020-0130. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/TLO-07-2020-0130
    View in Google Scholar
34. Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1985). A conceptual model of service quality and its implications for future research. Journal of Marketing, 49(4), 41–50. doi: 10.1177/002224298504900403. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/002224298504900403
    View in Google Scholar
35. Philipsen, S., Stamhuis, E., & de Jong, M. (2021). Legal enclaves as a test environ-ment for innovative products: Toward legally resilient experimentation poli-cies. Regulation & Governance, 15(4), 1128–1143. doi: 10.1111/rego.12375. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12375
    View in Google Scholar
36. Phillips, W., Roehrich, J. K., & Kapletia, D. (2023). Responding to information asymmetry in crisis situations: Innovation in the time of the COVID-19 pan-demic. Public Management Review, 25(1), 175–198. doi: 10.1080/14719037.2021.1960737. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2021.1960737
    View in Google Scholar
37. Plimmer, G., Berman, E. M., Malinen, S., Franken, E., Naswall, K., Kuntz, J., & Löfgren, K. (2022). Resilience in public sector managers. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 42(2), 338–367. doi: 10.1177/0734371X20985105. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X20985105
    View in Google Scholar
38. Rajala, T., & Jalonen, H. (2023). Stress tests for public service resilience: Introduc-ing the possible-worlds thinking. Public Management Review, 25(4), 762–786. doi: 10.1080/14719037.2022.2048686. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2022.2048686
    View in Google Scholar
39. Reichenbach, R., Lynn, J., & Heeg, J. (2021). Learning amid disruption: Bouncing forward into a changed world. Foundation Review, 13(3), 30–46. doi: 10.9707/ 1944-5660.1577. DOI: https://doi.org/10.9707/1944-5660.1577
    View in Google Scholar
40. Rochet, C., Keramidas, O., & Bout, L. (2008). Crisis as change strategy in public organizations. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 74(1), 65–77. doi: 10.1177/0020852307085734. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852307085734
    View in Google Scholar
41. Roemer, K. F., & Haggerty, J. H. (2022). The energy transition as fiscal rupture: Public services and resilience pathways in a coal company town. Energy Re-search & Social Science, 91, 102752. doi: 10.1016/j.erss.2022.102752. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2022.102752
    View in Google Scholar
42. Shaw, K. (2012). The rise of the resilient local authority? Local Government Studies, 38(3), 281–300. doi: 10.1080/03003930.2011.642869. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03003930.2011.642869
    View in Google Scholar
43. Slaymaker, R. R., O'Byrne, K. K., & Williams, P. E. (2022). The influence of socio-cognitive mindfulness and resilience on middle managers' stress and thriving during COVID-19: Results from two studies. Journal of Management Develop-ment, 42(1), 54–75. doi: 10.1108/JMD-05-2022-0112. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JMD-05-2022-0112
    View in Google Scholar
44. Šperka, R., & Halaška, M. (2017). The impact of sales service in MAREA trading simulation under changing environment circumstances. Equilibrium. Quarterly Journal of Economics and Economic Policy, 12(2), 355–371. doi: 10.24136/eq.v12i2.19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24136/eq.v12i2.19
    View in Google Scholar
45. Termeer, C. J. A. M., & van den Brink, M. A. (2013). Organizational conditions for dealing with the unknown unknown. Public Management Review, 15(1), 43–62. doi: 10.1080/14719037.2012.664014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2012.664014
    View in Google Scholar
46. Ticlau, T., Hintea, C., & Trofin, C. (2021). Resilient leadership. Qualitative study on factors influencing organizational resilience and adaptive response to ad-versity. Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences, 2021(Special issue), 127–143. doi: 10.24193/tras.si2021.7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24193/tras.SI2021.7
    View in Google Scholar
47. Van Loon, N. (2016). Is public service motivation related to overall and dimen-sional work-unit performance as indicated by supervisors? International Public Management Journal, 19(1), 78–110. doi: 10.1080/10967494.2015.1064839. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10967494.2015.1064839
    View in Google Scholar
48. Verlinden, S., Wynen, J., Kleizen, B., & Verhoest, K. (2022). Blurred lines: Explor-ing the impact of change complexity on role clarity in the public sector. Review of Public Personnel Administration. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1177/073 4371X221093573. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X221093573
    View in Google Scholar
49. Vigoda-Gadot, E., Cohen, N., & Mizrahi, S. (2022). Battling COVID-19: Public personnel management, trust, and social resilience during a global crisis. Re-view of Public Personnel Administration. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1177/07343 71X221111479. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X221111479
    View in Google Scholar
50. Waithaka, D., Kagwanja, N., Nzinga, J., Tsofa, B., Leli, H., Mataza, C., Nyaguara, A., Bejon, P., Gilson, L., Barasa, E., & Molyneux, S. (2020). Prolonged health worker strikes in Kenya- perspectives and experiences of frontline health managers and local communities in Kilifi County. International Journal for Equi-ty in Health, 19(1), 23. doi: 10.1186/s12939-020-1131-y. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-020-1131-y
    View in Google Scholar
51. Węgrzyn, J. (2018). Does experience exert impact on a public-private partnership performance? The case of Poland. Equilibrium. Quarterly Journal of Economics and Economic Policy, 13(3), 509–522. doi: 10.24136/eq.2018.025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24136/eq.2018.025
    View in Google Scholar
52. Whitman, Z., Kachali, H., Roger, D., Vargo, J., & Seville, E. (2013). Short-form version of the Benchmark Resilience Tool (BRT-53). Measuring Business Excel-lence, 17(3), 3–14. doi: 10.1108/MBE-05-2012-0030. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/MBE-05-2012-0030
    View in Google Scholar
53. Ziakis, C., & Kydros, D. (2022). Using machine learning models to investigate consumer attitudes toward online behavioral advertising. Intellectual Economics, 16(2), 61–75. doi: 10.13165/IE-22-16-2-04. DOI: https://doi.org/10.13165/IE-22-16-2-04
    View in Google Scholar