(With Imran Rasul, Daniel Rogger and Martin Williams) (Submitted)
Abstract: Organizational culture is an important driver of organizational performance, but evidence on how to improve performance-oriented organizational cultures is scarce – especially in the public sector. We partnered with Ghana’s Civil Service to design a new innovation training module geared towards such culture change and deliver it on a randomized basis to mid- level bureaucrats in central government. The intervention was delivered at full scale by integrating it into the Civil Service’s standard training routine for one year. We find that the training improved organizational culture and performance 6-18 months post-training. Our design was split between an individual-focused training arm and one in which officials from an entire organizational unit were trained together. Our results are completely driven by the individual-focused arm, with the team-based treatment arm having no impact on culture or performance. We discuss potential explanations for this difference in effectiveness. Simple and scalable training interventions can thus have significant impacts on culture and performance, but their design matters.
[NEW VERSION COMING SOON]
Abstract: Do political connections distort the allocation of public goods across regions? This paper answers this question in the context of partisan connections between Brazilian municipalities and national level ministries approving grants for cities. Ministries are occupied by different political parties over years, providing exogenous variation in connections within a given city, across ministries. Also, administrative data on the universe of grant requests and approvals between 2009-16 from all ministries allows for evidence for many types of public goods, and for direct and indirect effects of connections over grant approvals and requests. Reduced form evidence from a triple differences design within city, ministry and year shows that when a minister changes, cities with mayors in the same party of the new minister request 15% more money and get 14.8% more money approved from that ministry. Additional evidence suggests these are unlikely to be fully explained by ideological alignment, soft information or differences in enforcement. A structural model of grant requests and approvals estimates small ministerial biases towards connected cities and almost linear returns in project size. Due to the linear returns, connected cities request significantly larger grants. If political connections are the only source of distortion in the ministry’s decision function, the small bias implies small amounts of misallocation, and the welfare losses due to political connections are of only 0.24% of the average ministry’s budget.
Coverage: VoxDev