Innovative Leadership-a Missing Puzzle in the Economic Administration of the Judiciary in the Czech Republic

Martin Viktora

doi:10.36745/ijca.438

Innovative Leadership-a Missing Puzzle in the Economic Administration of the Judiciary in the Czech Republic

International Journal for Court Administration

Volume 13 (2022): Issue 3

By: Martin Viktora

Open Access

|Dec 2022

Abstract

This article dissertation aims to define the role of innovative leadership in the context of other leadership roles in the court’s administration of the Czech Republic and to define its influence on the perception and attitudes of followers. Specifically, these are the roles of accountability, compliance with rules and regulations, political loyalty and network governance. The attitudes of followers are represented by the dimensions of perceived leadership effectiveness, organizational commitment and work engagement. The theoretical model is created verified in the practical part on this basis. Hypotheses are tested using structural modelling. Factor analysis evaluates the data sample; the results are further specified using contextual interviews. The results of data analysis have not supported the hypothesis of a strong influence of the role of accountability on the attitudes of followers in the judicial administration. Unlike other examined leadership roles, the results of data analysis indicate a significant influence of the innovative leadership role on followers’ attitudes and define its function as an essential driver of procedural and organizational changes in the economic section of the Czech courts.

References

Anderson, N. R., & West, M. A. (1998). Measuring climate for work group innovation: development and validation of the team climate inventory. Journal of Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior, 19(3), 235–258. DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1379(199805)19:3<;235::AID-JOB837>3.0.CO;2-C
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Aspen institut Central Europe (2019). Kam kráČíš Česko. Sborník konference 2019. Praha.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Bentler, P.M. (1990). Comparative Fit Indexes in Structural Models, Psychological Bulletin, 107, 2, 238–46. DOI: 10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Brown, T. A. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York: The Guilford Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Bunjevac, T. (2011). Court Governance in Context: Beyond Independence. International Journal for Court Administration, December, pp. 1–12. DOI: 10.18352/ijca.68
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Byrne, B. M., Shavelson, R. J., & Muthén, B. (1989). Testing for the equivalence of factor covariance and mean structures: the issue of partial measurement invariance. Psychological Bulletin, 105(3), 456. DOI: 10.1037/0033-2909.105.3.456
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
CEPEJ (2016) https://rm.coe.int/rapport-avec-couv-18-09-2018-en/16808def9c Retrieved 4.3.2020
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
CEPEJ (2022). https://www.coe.int/en/web/cepej/cepej-work/evaluation-of-judicial-systems Retrieved 20.october 2022
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Černý, P. (2019). Nejvyšší rada soudnictví – palcát nebo štít? https://www.pravniprostor.cz/nazory/ocima-petra-cerneho/nejvyssi-rada-soudnictvi-palcat-nebo-stit-dil-i. Staženo 20.12.2019
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Creswell, J. W. & Clarc, L. P. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Currie, G., Grubnic, S. and Hodges, R. (2011). ‘Leadership in Public Services Networks: Antecedents, Process and Outcome’, Public Administration, 89, 2, 242–64. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9299.2011.01931.x
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Czarniawska, B., & Mazza, C. (2003). Consulting as a liminal space. Human relations, 56(3), 267–290. DOI: 10.1177/0018726703056003612
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
De Jong, J., & Den Hartog, D. (2010). Measuring innovative work behaviour. Creativity and innovation management, 19(1), 23–36. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8691.2010.00547.x
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
De Vellis, R.F. (2016). Scale Development: Theory and Applications. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Dorsman, S. (2017). Leadership and innovation in the public sector: studying the organizational, team and individual level. Thesis University of Rotterdam NL.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Edel, F. (2007). The civil and criminal proceedings length in the European Court of Human Rights case-law, Strasburg, p.7.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
EU Justice scoreboard (2019). https://ec.europa.eu/info/policies/justice-and-fundamental-rights/upholding-rule-law/eu-justice-scoreboard_en#scoreboards. Retrieved 1.2.2020
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
European judicial systems-Efficiency and quality of justice-CEPEJ Studies No. 26
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Fernandez, S. (2005). Developing and Testing an Integrative Framework of Public Sector Leadership: Evidence from the Public Education Arena‘, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15, 2, 197–217. DOI: 10.1093/jopart/mui014
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Friesen, E.C. (1971). Constraints and Conflicts in Court Administration. Public Administration Review, Vol. 31, No. 2, pp. 120–124. DOI: 10.2307/974662
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Guba, E. G. & Lincoln, Y. S. (1981). Effective evaluation: Improving the usefulness of evaluation results through responsive and naturalistic approaches. Jossey-Bass.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Hart, P. T. & Tummers, L. (2019). Understanding public leadership. Macmillan International Higher Education.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Hinkin, T. R. (1998). A Brief Tutorial on the Development of Measures for Use in Survey Questionnaires. Organizational Research Methods, 1(1), 104–121. DOI: 10.1177/109442819800100106
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Hollanders, H., Arundel, A., Buligescu, B., Peter, V., Roman, L., Simmonds, P., & Es-Sadki, N. (2013). European Public Sector Innovation Scoreboard 2013.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Kearns, K.P. (1996). Managing for Accountability: Preserving the Public Trust in Public and Nonprofit Organizations. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Kettiger, D., Lienhard, A., Langbroek, P. & Fabri, M. (2019). Court Management: A Young Field of Public Management. In Public Administration in Europe (pp. 309–315). Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-92856-2_28
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Legal executive institute (2017). The future of the courts. A white paper. http://www.legalexecutiveinstitute.com/future-of-courts-white-paper/ Downloaded 3.11.2018.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Ministerstvo spravedlnosti, VýroČní zpráva, 2017, 2018, 2019.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Ministry of the Interior of the Czech Republic, (2017) Veřejná správa v České republice
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Murillo, R., & Zuniga, R. (2013). Could Innovation also Emerge from the Public Sector: Creating ISO-like Judiciary Quality Management Standard. International Journal for court administration (Vol. 5, p. 10). DOI: 10.18352/ijca.16
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Ochrana, F., & PůČek, M. (2011). Efektivní zavádění a řízení změn ve veřejné správě: smart administration. Wolters Kluwer Česká republika.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Pauliat, H. (2007). L’administration de la justice et la qualité des décisions de justice. La qualité des décisions de justice.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Perez Bernardez, C. (2016). The European Union Against the Erosion of the Rule of Law: The Legal.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Peyrache, A. & Zago, A. (2015). Large courts, small justice! Omega. DOI: 10.1016/j.omega.2015.11.002
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Piana, D. (2012). Assessing and Filling the Gap as a New Mode of Governance, Lessons from Preliminary Study carried out in the Cosenza‘s Public Prosecutors’ Office. International Journal for Court Administration, June, pp. 1–18. DOI: 10.18352/ijca.78
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Piana, D. (2013). Knowledge Transfer as a Leverage of Change: The Case of the Public Prosecutor Office of Naples. International Journal of Court Administration, Vol. 5 No. 2, October pp. 31–41. DOI: 10.18352/ijca.14
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Schelleová, I. & Schelle, K. (2004). Soudnictví: historie, souČasnost a perspektivy. 20–25 Prague: Eurolex Bohemia
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Schumpeter, J. A. (1942). Socialism, capitalism and democracy. Harper and Brothers
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Supreme Court (2022). Justice before the collapse: Press conference https://www.nsoud.cz/Judikatura/ns_web.nsf/web/Proverejnostamedia~TiskovezpravyNejvyssihosoudu~Pozvanka_na_tiskovou_konferenci_19__10__2022__Justice_pred_kolapsem_~?open&lng=CZ
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
ŠpaČek, D. (2016). Public management: v teorii a praxi. CH Beck.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Tummers, L. & Knies, E. (2016). Measuring public leadership: developing scales for four key public leadership roles. Public Administration, 94(2), 433–451. DOI: 10.1111/padm.12224
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Van der Wal, Z., De Graaf, G., & Lasthuizen, K. (2008). What‘s valued most? Similarities and differences between the organizational values of the public and private sector. Public administration, 86(2), 465–482. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9299.2008.00719.x
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Viapiana, F. (2018). Pressure on Judges: How the Budgeting System Can Impact Judge‘s Autonomy. Laws, 7(4), 38. DOI: 10.3390/laws7040038
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Vogel, D., Reuber, A., & Vogel, R. (2020). Developing a short scale to assess public leadership. Public Administration.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Výrost, R., & Slaměník, I. (2008). Sociální psychologie. Grada Praha.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article