The public service is to be responsible for both the state and the individual by taking into consideration the common interest. It has also adopted a policy of service to both the organization and the individual. Public service employees are also obliged to perform these services provided by the state. Citizens, rather than encountering high-level bureaucrats, teachers, police officers, judges, health workers, such as are in contact with public officials. Lipsky (1980) defined these types of public officials as street-level bureaucrats who directly interact with citizens and have strong discretion. Through the authority granted by the state, these officials have kept their businesses wide and have become an important decision-making mechanism in the problems that will arise within the scope of their services. These critical roles have increased their spiritual and material values. On the one hand, the scope and content of these services and their relationship with citizens during their provision of services often led to controversy.
The scope and content of public services, the first issue, is related to whether the street-level bureaucrats are subject to certain limits and lines. In my opinion, this service, which these officials offer to citizens, requires serious labor and effort. Therefore, in the provision of public service, it is necessary not to impose a material restriction on them and to provide the best and highest level of service for the society. The scope and content of their duties should be kept broad and the maximum level of communication with the citizens should be maintained due to their duties in the critical points they undertake. For instance, a kindergarten teacher takes care of children about six hours a day and does their best for their development because children shape their lives through the education they receive at that age, teachers should be given financial support for the content of the education as well as giving them the authority to make the curriculum as they wish. Another important issue is the relation of street-level bureaucrats with citizens because their decisions affect the individual in the long or short term. These officials need to make an immediate and on-the-spot decision with an objective perspective, free of both positive and negative human feelings. For instance, any wrong instruction by a police chief to police personnel in its sub-units could create irreversible consequences, such as disproportionate use of force.
These public bureaucrats, who are public laborers, represent the society. They provide the social order with the features and capabilities they possess. Therefore, the scope and scope should be kept broad. They may be taught through objective stages of specific training, if necessary, and they should be consulted by putting an upper authority and by making arrangements to control them. Also, their work should be facilitated, because these laborers, who are the closest units of the state to us, strive for the improvement of society and spend all their lives to be successful in their fields. Thus, we must do our best to make them feel better.
Lipsky, M. 1980 (2010). Streel-level Bureaucracy : dilemmas of the individual in public services, Russell Sage Foundation.
Middle East Technical University
Department of Political Science and Public Administration