Political Interests, Fiscal Capacity, Price Priority, and Employee Safeguards in Outsourcing Contracts

Gustav Egede Hansen & Bjarke Lund-Sørensen

Review of Public Personnel Administration2026https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371x261419137article
AJG 2ABDC B
Weight
0.50

What the paper says

Outsourcing comes with potential negative employee-related social costs since private sector organizations are not obliged to uphold public personnel regulations. In response, some local governments specify contract rules safeguarding outsourced employees. To understand why, we combine literature on outsourced employees and incomplete contracts. We hypothesize that employee safeguards are a function of local governments’ political interests, fiscal capacity, and priority of contract price. Collaborating with purchasing practitioners, we develop a safeguard catalog and determine the use of safeguards in a unique dataset of 3,396 documents related to 247 Danish tenders involving the transfers of employees from public to private employment. We find that local governments with less fiscal capacity and more price orientation include fewer safeguards. These findings signal that certain local governments have more willingness and capacity to safeguard employees and thus potentially decrease unaccounted employee-related social costs of outsourcing.

Open paper page →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371x261419137

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{gustav2026,
  title        = {{Political Interests, Fiscal Capacity, Price Priority, and Employee Safeguards in Outsourcing Contracts}},
  author       = {Gustav Egede Hansen & Bjarke Lund-Sørensen},
  journal      = {Review of Public Personnel Administration},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371x261419137},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Political Interests, Fiscal Capacity, Price Priority, and Employee Safeguards in Outsourcing Contracts

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.