Comparing the Roles of Political Appointees and Career Executives in the U.S. Federal Executive Branch

Abstract

This study uses Anthony Downs’s well-known typology of bureaucratic roles (climbers, conservers, advocates, zealots, and statesmen) as a theoretical template to examine the roles of political appointees and career executives serving in Washington, D.C. during the Reagan administration. Officials were asked to rank various personal goals in a 1987 survey. Political appointees were more likely to endorse climber (career advancement) and zealot (policy promotion) goals. Career executives were more likely to endorse advocate (support for the organization) responses. Notably, both political and career officials ranked zealot and statesman goals highly, suggesting that each group gains significant psychic income from supporting policies they believe in and from serving their country. Furthermore, each group was relatively unlikely to endorse conserver options, suggesting that those who reach the highest rungs of the civil service, whether political or career, are not motivated by job security or a limited workload.