The influence of stakeholder attributes and salience on accountability and backlog of infrastructure assets: evidence from local government mayors and CEOs
Creators: name: Siriwardhane, Pavithra
Publisher: name: RMIT University
Year: 2024

description: The presence of multiple external stakeholders with diverse needs and expectations concerning infrastructure decisions is a key feature of infrastructure asset management by local government authorities (LGAs). Such stakeholders range from groups at the public level to groups at the higher-tier government level. The elected leader, the Mayor , and the appointed leader, the Chief Executive Officer (CEO), will be ultimately accountable to these multiple stakeholders for the policies, plans, decisions and performance of their LGA’s infrastructure assets.<br><br>This study presents evidence obtained from mail surveys and secondary data in the context of local government about the extent of perceptions of Mayors and CEOs of the attributes and salience of various stakeholders influence on accountability, and renewal backlog performance of infrastructure assets. It has sought to advance the modelling and testing of the application of stakeholder theory in the public sector through Mayors and CEOs of Australian LGAs. Mitchell et al.’s (1997) version of stakeholder theory, referred to as stakeholder identification and salience theory is adopted. In its modelling, the study has integrated the concepts of stakeholder attributes, stakeholder salience, managerial values, organisational accountability and organisational performance. <br><br>Results first reveal that there are more similarities than differences with regard to perceived attributes of power, legitimacy and urgency of different stakeholder groups between the perceptions of Mayors and CEOs. Both rate ‘public stakeholders’ (except media) more highly than ‘higher-tier government stakeholders’. Second, the results, reveal that legitimacy and urgency, but not power, affect the extent of salience accorded to most stakeholder groups by the Mayors and CEOs, respectively. This suggests they each view stakeholders in infrastructure decision-making as largely ‘expectant dependant’ (i.e., lacking power but having urgent legitimate claims) under Mitchell et al.’s (1997) stakeholder typology. However, the results of the analysis change in the combined sample of the Mayor and CEO. Third, the results give support to the hypothesis that managerial values held by Mayors positively affect the extent of salience accorded to public stakeholders. Fourthly, the overall accountability for infrastructure, as rated by Mayors and CEOs, is influenced by the extent of salience accorded to the demands of public stakeholders, but not by the higher-tier government stakeholders. When looking at the three dimensions of accountability, it is found that both public and managerial types of accountability are significantly greater when public stakeholder salience is higher. In contrast, political accountability is significantly greater when the salience accorded to higher-tier government stakeholders is higher. Finally, the results reveal that neither the extent of salience given to stakeholders by Mayors and CEOs, nor the managerial values they hold, have a significant influence on the level of infrastructure renewal backlog. Stakeholder theory has been unable to explain the aggregate infrastructure performance of LGAs as measured by their ‘renewal ratio’. The results of the study have important implications for governance and accountability in local government, and for the extension of stakeholder theory.