Explorando a burocracia de médio escalão: uma tentativa de tipologia

O principal objetivo deste artigo é apresentar uma tipologia original de burocratas situados no nível intermediário da estrutura do serviço público. Esse conjunto específico de atores, os burocratas de médio escalão (BME), é visto como um grupo estratégico em função do seu papel de ligação e posição entre o alto escalão e os executores das políticas. Apesar de sua relevância e da reconhecida heterogeneidade, poucos estudos têm essa diversidade e efeitos no policymaking. Para cobrir esta lacuna e aprofundar na compreensão dos BMEs, este artigo propõe uma tipologia que inclui importantes dimensões, como perfil, trajetórias e desempenho, e assim, confirma empiricamente o pressuposto da heterogeneidade no serviço público federal brasileiro.

Palavras-chave:
burocrata de médio escalão; tipologia; formulação e implementação de políticas públicas; Brasil

Autoria

Pedro L. C. Cavalcante

Public policy manager - Institute of Applied Economic Research (Ipea) - Brasilia, DF, Brazil.Institute of Applied Economic ResearchBrazilBrasilia, DF, BrazilPublic policy manager - Institute of Applied Economic Research (Ipea) - Brasilia, DF, Brazil.

Gabriela S. Lotta

Professor - Federal University of ABC (UFABC) - São Paulo, SP, Brazil.Federal University of ABCBrazilSão Paulo, SP, BrazilProfessor - Federal University of ABC (UFABC) - São Paulo, SP, Brazil.

Erika M. K. Yamada

Undergraduate Student - Federal University of ABC (UFABC) -, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.Federal University of ABCBrazilSão Paulo, SP, BrazilUndergraduate Student - Federal University of ABC (UFABC) -, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.

SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

Professor - Federal University of ABC (UFABC) - São Paulo, SP, Brazil.Federal University of ABCBrazilSão Paulo, SP, BrazilProfessor - Federal University of ABC (UFABC) - São Paulo, SP, Brazil.

Figuras | Tabelas | Fórmulas

Figuras (2)
Tabelas (4)
Fórmulas (2)

Thumbnail

Figure 1.
Performance Dimensions and Hierarchical/Educational Levels

Thumbnail

Figure 2.
MLB’s Typology and its Middle Ages Analogy

Thumbnail

Chart 1.
Hierarchic levels and functions of DAS posts in the Federal Government

Thumbnail

Table 1.
Groups and General Descriptions

Thumbnail

Table 2
List of variables and loadings of the first component

Thumbnail

Table 3.
List of variables and loading of the first component

Thumbnail

Figure 1. Performance Dimensions and Hierarchical/Educational Levels

Source: Authors, based on Mid-level Bureaucrats Surveys

Figure 2. MLB’s Typology and its Middle Ages Analogy

Source: Authors, based on Mid-level Bureaucrats Survey

Chart 1. Hierarchic levels and functions of DAS posts in the Federal Government

Hierarchical	Functions
Hierarchical	Executive	Advisory
DAS 5	Minister’s Chief of Staff	Minister’s Special Advisor
	Head of Department
	Legal Advisor
	Internal Control Secretary
	Undersecretary for Administration
DAS 4	General Coordinator	Advisor
DAS 3	Coordinator	Technical Advisor
DAS 2	Head of Division	Assistant
DAS 1	Head of a Section	Technical Assistant

Source: Brazil (2015).

Table 1. Groups and General Descriptions

	Group 1	Group 2	Group 3	Group 4	Group 5	General
DAS
1	180 (10.2%)	250 (21.84%)	333 (36.12%)	161 (36.35%)	1004 (35.82%)	1928 (27.24%)
2	301 (17.06%)	204 (17.82%)	189 (20.5%)	126 (28.45%)	860 (30.69%)	1680 (23.74%)
3	416 (23.57%)	250 (21.84%)	192 (20.83%)	95 (21.45%)	590 (21.05%)	1543 (21.8%)
4	577 (32.7%)	353 (30.83%)	146 (15.84%)	47 (10.61%)	292 (10.42%)	1415 (20%)
5	291 (16.49%)	88 (7.69%)	62 (6.73%)	14 (3.17%)	57 (2.04%)	512 (7.24%)
Advisor?
No	1273 (72.13%)	456 (39.83%)	797 (86.45%)	0 (0%)	2803 (100%)	5329 (75.29%)
Yes	492 (27.88%)	689 (60.18%)	125 (13.56%)	443 (100%)	0 (0%)	1749 (24.72%)
Career
Non-career civil servant	509 (28.84%)	0 (0%)	123 (13.35%)	443 (100%)	635 (22.66%)	1710 (24.16%)
Career civil servants	1256 (71.17%)	1145 (100%)	799 (86.66%)	0 (0%)	2168 (77.35%)	5368 (75.85%)
Work in the Federal District?
No	0 (0%)	166 (14.5%)	922 (100%)	95 (21.45%)	1463 (52.2%)	2646 (37.39%)
Yes	1765 (100%)	979 (85.51%)	0 (0%)	348 (78.56%)	1340 (47.81%)	4432 (62.62%)
Influential
No	0 (0%)	1145 (100%)	0 (0%)	413 (93.23%)	2803 (100%)	4361 (61.62%)
Yes	1765 (100%)	0 (0%)	922 (100%)	30 (6.78%)	0 (0%)	2717 (38.39%)
Education Level
Elementary School	0 (0%)	2 (0.18%)	1 (0.11%)	1 (0.23%)	7 (0.25%)	11 (0.16%)
High School / Technical Education	56 (3.18%)	54 (4.72%)	30 (3.26%)	61 (13.77%)	216 (7.71%)	417 (5.9%)
Bachelor	445 (25.22%)	286 (24.98%)	254 (27.55%)	227 (51.25%)	1062 (37.89%)	2274 (32.13%)
Specialization	771 (43.69%)	466 (40.7%)	346 (37.53%)	125 (28.22%)	1081 (38.57%)	2789 (39.41%)
Master’s degree	374 (21.19%)	228 (19.92%)	173 (18.77%)	26 (5.87%)	340 (12.13%)	1141 (16.13%)
Doctorate degree	119 (6.75%)	109 (9.52%)	118 (12.8%)	3 (0.68%)	97 (3.47%)	446 (6.31%)
IRB Average	0.61	0.54	0.59	0.52	0.52	0.55
IBA Average	0.76	0.68	0.75	0.61	0.65	0.69
Age Average	42.99	44.96	48.06	40.12	44.88	44.53
Years of working in the federal government (average)	13.64	16.13	17.41	8.55	14.20	14.43
Years as manager in the federal government (average)	7.19	7.14	8.57	2.73	6.08	6.64
MLBs	1765	1145	922	443	2803	7078

Source: Author, based on Mid-level Bureaucrats Surveys.

Table 2 List of variables and loadings of the first component

	Dimension	Primary Indicator	Eigenvalue
Index of MLB Relationships (IBR)	Intra-organizational	Superiors	1.4
		Subordinates
		Colleagues of the same hierarchical level
	Inter-government	Other bodies (except Civil Office)	2.74
		Civil Office
		Politicians
		Control bodies (General Comptroller of the Union, Federal Court of Accounts)
		Judiciary bodies
		States and municipalities
	Non-governmental	International organizations	2.45
		Media
		Civil society

Source: Authors, based on Mid-level Bureaucrats Surveys

Table 3. List of variables and loading of the first component

	Primary Indicator	Eigenvalue
Index of MLB Activities (IBA)	Contacts and individual conversations (e.g. phone calls, clearances, etc.)	3,55
	Participate in meetings with internal agency staff
	Attend meetings with external parties
	Provide or validate data for of systems information
	Conduct research and studies (reading, searching for information, consulting experts)
	Business Travel
	Produce and validate internal documents (e.g. technical opinion, reports, plans, spreadsheets and presentations)
	Produce and validate normative documents (e.g. drafts of decree resolutions or ordinance or regulation)
	Produce and validate external circulation of documents (e.g. releases, flyers, brochures and manuals)
	Organize or participate in events (conferences, lectures and congresses)

Source: Authors, based on Mid-level Bureaucrats Surveys

I S_{i}^{X} = [\frac{X i - X \min}{X \max - X \min}] * 100 = 0 \dots 100

S i j = \frac{\sum_{k = 1}^{p} w_{k} s_{k}}{\sum_{k = 1}^{p} s_{k}}, \cdot S_{i f} \in [0,1]

Como citar

copiar

Universidade de Brasília. Instituto de Ciência Política Instituto de Ciência Política, Universidade de Brasília, Campus Universitário Darcy Ribeiro - Gleba A Asa Norte, 70904-970 Brasília - DF Brasil, Tel.: (55 61) 3107-0777 , Cel.: (55 61) 3107 0780 - Brasília - DF - Brazil
E-mail: rbcp@unb.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

Versão para download de PDF

PDF

Inglês

Versões e tradução automática

Versão original do texto

English

Tradução automática

Google Translator
Microsoft Translator

Como citar

RIS

BIBTEX

Outros formatos de citação e exportação:

SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online
Rua Dr. Diogo de Faria, 1087 – 9º andar – Vila Clementino 04037-003 São Paulo/SP - Brasil
E-mail: scielo@scielo.org

Leia a Declaração de Acesso Aberto

Métricas

Explorando a burocracia de médio escalão: uma tentativa de tipologia

PlumX

Mensagem

[TFN1] Source: Brazil (2015).