216 Public Administration Review • March | April 2012 management practices that can be adapted to govern- ment, fundamental diff erences exist between the two sectors. Th is run-government-like a-business rhetoric undoubtedly will gain even more momentum as we move further into the silly season of the presidential campaign. In contrast, this article provides more evidence that managing in government is distinctly diff erent from managing in the private sector. While those of us who have devoted our careers to government may take this on faith, much of the general public has a diff erent view. One key area of diff erence relates to the public and private sector workforces. Th ese diff erences include what motivates our employees to serve—and succeed— in government and how leaders who understand these motivations can apply this knowledge. As documented in “Pulling the Levers” and elsewhere, this understand- ing should inform how government agencies select, develop, motivate, advance, and retain talent. Th is research also can be linked to the critical issue of why public sector leaders should focus on improving employee engagement and the steps leaders can take to drive higher levels of engagement. Other research has documented that employee engagement can be a powerful force for individual and organizational eff ectiveness. In the private sector, this translates into superior fi nancial performance as well as lower turno- ver, less employee lost time, and fewer accidents. Th e latter impacts clearly translate to the public sector. Moreover, research on employee engagement that specifi cally focuses on government shows that agencies with higher levels of engagement have more success achieving their strategic goals. Th e link between the work of Wright, Moynihan, and Pandey and the engagement research stems from the According to a 2011 survey conducted by the Center for State and Local Government Excellence, state and local government execu- tives reported that the number-one issue they face today is morale. Recently released results from the Partnership for Public Service’s annual “Best Places to Work in the Federal Government” rankings (based on surveys of more than 265,000 federal employees) showed a decline in job satisfaction across the federal government. Th ese results should not be surprising given the current wave of attacks on the public sector and, sadly, on public servants. A diffi cult economic and political climate has led to a decline in confi dence in government, as well as public sector pay freezes, cuts in worker benefi ts, threats of government shutdowns, and the certainty of budget reductions. In this tough environment, “Pulling the Levers” has important implications for practitioners. In particular, the results provide the following: • Additional—and timely—evidence that the public sector is indeed diff erent from the pri- vate sector. As a result, managing in gove.

1. 216 Public Administration Review • March | April 2012
management practices that can be adapted to govern-
ment, fundamental diff erences exist between the two
sectors.
Th is run-government-like a-business rhetoric
undoubtedly will gain even more momentum as we
move further into the silly season of the presidential
campaign.
In contrast, this article provides more evidence that
managing in government is distinctly diff erent from
managing in the private sector. While those of us who
have devoted our careers to government may take this
on faith, much of the general public has a diff erent
view.
One key area of diff erence relates to the public and
private sector workforces. Th ese diff erences include
what motivates our employees to serve—and succeed—
in government and how leaders who understand these
motivations can apply this knowledge. As documented
in “Pulling the Levers” and elsewhere, this understand-
ing should inform how government agencies select,
develop, motivate, advance, and retain talent.
Th is research also can be linked to the critical issue of
why public sector leaders should focus on improving
employee engagement and the steps leaders can take
to drive higher levels of engagement. Other research
has documented that employee engagement can be

2. a powerful force for individual and organizational
eff ectiveness. In the private sector, this translates into
superior fi nancial performance as well as lower turno-
ver, less employee lost time, and fewer accidents. Th e
latter impacts clearly translate to the public sector.
Moreover, research on employee engagement that
specifi cally focuses on government shows that agencies
with higher levels of engagement have more success
achieving their strategic goals.
Th e link between the work of Wright, Moynihan, and
Pandey and the engagement research stems from the
According to a 2011 survey conducted by the Center for State
and Local Government Excellence, state and local government
execu-
tives reported that the number-one issue they face
today is morale. Recently released results from the
Partnership for Public Service’s annual “Best Places
to Work in the Federal Government” rankings (based
on surveys of more than 265,000 federal employees)
showed a decline in job satisfaction across the federal
government.
Th ese results should not be surprising given the
current wave of attacks on the public sector and,
sadly, on public servants. A diffi cult economic and
political climate has led to a decline in confi dence in
government, as well as public sector pay freezes, cuts
in worker benefi ts, threats of government shutdowns,
and the certainty of budget reductions.
In this tough environment, “Pulling the Levers” has
important implications for practitioners. In particular,
the results provide the following:

3. • Additional—and timely—evidence that the
public sector is indeed diff erent from the pri-
vate sector. As a result, managing in government
requires diff erent strategies and approaches than
managing in the private sector.
• A connection to research on the topic of
employee engagement, including the role of the
leader in driving high levels of engagement, which
can be a powerful force for individual and organiza-
tional eff ectiveness.
Th is research should be another stop sign for those
who argue that public sector leaders should “run
government like a business.” As government continues
to come under harsh criticism—including the char-
acterization of government workers as underworked
and overpaid—the knee-jerk reaction will continue
to be that government should look and act more
like the private sector. While there are private sector
Commentary on “Pulling the Levers: Transformational
Leadership, Public Service Motivation, and Mission Valence”
Bob Lavigna
University of Wisconsin
Bob Lavigna is human resources director
for the University of Wisconsin. Previously,
he was vice president for research for the
Partnership for Public Service, senior man-
ager of consulting for CPS Human Resource

4. Services, and administrator of the Wisconsin
merit system. He began his career with
the U.S. Government Accountability Offi ce.
He is past president of the International
Public Management Association for Human
Resources and the ASPA Personnel Section.
He holds a master’s degree in human
resources from Cornell University.
E-mail : [email protected]
Commentary
Public Administration Review,
Vol. 72, Iss. 2, pp. 216–217. © 2012 by
The American Society for Public Administration.
DOI: 10.111/j.1540-6210.2011.02557.x.
Commentary 217
and engagement are not the same, other research has
shown that they are linked. Th e Partnership for Public
Service now has done these rankings six times since
2003 and, each time, eff ective leadership has been the

5. primary driver of employee satisfaction.
Th e bottom line is that public sector leaders must
understand the levers that the authors describe and
then apply them in a way that is positive but not
manipulative. Th is means integrating public service
motivation into the ways in which we recruit, man-
age, develop, and retain talent.
Two other points that the authors make are also worth
remembering. First, while transformational leadership
and its impact on public service motivation is a pow-
erful force, it is unwise to ignore public sector com-
pensation. While the authors did not fi nd evidence
that pay motivates public servants, they also point
out that this should not be interpreted to mean that
pay does not matter. Th is is a key point, particularly
because the compensation of many public employees
actually is decreasing—the only aspect of pay that is
increasing is the employee’s share of benefi ts such as
retirement and health care. Th e net eff ect is a pay cut.
Also worth noting is the authors’ warning not to
underestimate the diffi culty of fi guring out how to
become a transformational leader. I am particularly
struck by this statement: “Th e crush of transactional
duties and the challenges of executing transforma-
tional competencies means that it is easier to call for
more transformational leadership than it is to do it.”
I fi ght this battle every day in my own struggle to be
an eff ective leader. Again, I believe that focusing on
what drives employee engagement can help answer the
fundamental question of how managers can become
transformational leaders.
argument that transformational leaders should make

6. explicit the line of sight between their employees’
jobs and the organization’s mission. Th ese leaders also
should work to foster a sense of pride in the organiza-
tion. Th is is consistent with research documenting how
leaders can move the needle of employee engagement—
and it is also quite actionable for practitioners who
understand the need to focus on engagement.
While a range of factors can drive engagement (and
are incorporated in various employee engagement
surveys), these factors primarily boil down to ensuring
that employees:
• See the link between their work and the organiza-
tion’s mission
• Take pride in both their work and the organiza-
tion
• Are satisfi ed with their supervisors and leaders
• Have the opportunity to perform well at work
• Can grow personally and professionally
• Are satisfi ed with recognition received
• Have real input to decision making (i.e., their
opinions count)
• Would recommend their organization as a good
place to work
Th is research parallels the message of “Pulling the
Levers,” particularly the conclusion that transforma-
tional leaders direct and inspire employees’ eff orts by
raising awareness of the importance of organizational
values and outcomes.
Th e 2011 “Best Places to Work in the Federal
Government” rankings show that leadership is the
number-one driver of employee satisfaction across
the entire federal government. While satisfaction

7. Copyright of Public Administration Review is the property of
Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be
copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv
without the copyright holder's express written
permission. However, users may print, download, or email
articles for individual use.