Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
This paper analyzes the impact of two governing boards on the effectiveness and morale of two state government wildlife management agencies. Participation in the decision-making process constitutes the core of the boards' performance; only secondarily do they engage in control activities, and they perform no economic role for the organizations. The boards' major function for effectiveness is service as a buffer group between the full-time staff and the public. With respect to dysfunctions for effectiveness, the boards act for the benefit of their home communities and require a sizable amount of attention from the staff to be kept informed on the problems of wildlife management. The staff is of the opinion that the boards create more contributions than problems with respect to effectiveness, and are basically satisfied with this system of authority.1 James Price is assistant professor, Department of Sociology, University of Oregon.
James L. Price (Sun,) studied this question.