Trapped on the Roller Coaster: Understanding Reputational Dynamics with the Narrative Policy Framework

How does a public organization’s reputation develop, and what factors are decisive for its development? These are the questions I want to tackle with my paper. Recent publications in the field of public administration agree that reputation matters for public organizations. A good reputation attracts skilled employees and establishes autonomy of action (Hinterleitner and Sager 2018). However, despite their crucial importance, reputations largely evade the control of their “owners”, i.e. the organizations. As the product of multiple audiences’ beliefs, reputations are of a symbolic nature, inherently ambiguous and susceptible to different interpretations (Carpenter 2010). In consequence, they can be subjected to rapid changes and seemingly unforeseeable dynamics. What qualifies as a good reputation today may already be shattered tomorrow. I propose to apply the Narrative Policy Framework (NPF) to capture such reputational developments and to make them amenable to thorough analysis. Conceived as a theory of the public policy process (Shanahan et al. 2017), the NPF enables the measurability and comparability of narratives that circulate about public actors. The NPF’s notion of narratives as a central heuristic for human cognition provides a helpful complement of reputation’s largely symbolic nature stated above. Thus, introducing the NPF to reputational research answers the call by Boon et al. (2019) to improve our understanding of audiences’ evaluation of public organizations, to investigate changes over time and to explore the role of crisis events. I present an empirical application of the NPF in reputational research by analyzing the case of the Swiss Child and Adult Protection Agencies (CAPA). Introduced after an institutional reform of the national guardianship law in 2013, the CAPA experienced an unprecedented decline of their reputation from “the new kid on the block” to “Switzerland’s most hated authority” (Dorer 2017) within less than three years. Various expert reports attesting good performance as well as appropriate procedures to the CAPA were not able to stop this development. To understand the discrepancy between expert judgment and public opinion I conduct a quantitative media analysis of articles featuring the CAPA in the years 2013 to 2016. References: Boon, J., Salomonsen, H. H., & Verhoest, K. (2019). A reputation for what, to whom, and in which task environment: A commentary. Regulation & Governance, 27(4), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12290 Carpenter, D. P. (2010). Reputation and Power: Organizational Image and Pharmaceutical Regulation at the FDA. Princeton studies in American politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Dorer, C. (2017). BLICKpunkt: Inakzeptabel. Retrieved from https://www.blick.ch/news/schweiz/blickpunkt/blickpunkt-inakzeptabel-id6600419.html Hinterleitner, M., & Sager, F. (2018). Blame, Reputation and Organizational Responses to a Politicized Climate. In T. Bach & K. Wegrich (Eds.), The Blind Spots of Public Bureaucracy and the Politics of Non‐Coordination (pp. 133–150). Cham: Springer International Publishing. Shanahan, E. A., Jones, M. D., McBeth, M. K., & Radaelli, C. M. (2017). The Narrative Policy Framework. In C. M. Weible & P. A. Sabatier (Eds.), Theories of the policy process (pp. 173–213). New York: Westview Press.