LAUSR

Red tape is a salient societal problem but there is a dearth of research on how perceived red tape can be reduced. Building on the transparency literature, we hypothesize that higher levels of rationale and process transparency will result in lower levels of perceived red tape. We test our reasoning using a survey experiment. Specifically, we have US citizens rate the level of red tape associated with the burdensome process of obtaining a driver’s license at the Department of Motor Vehicles. We find that providing rationale and process transparency to citizens does not influence perceived red tape. Hence, organizations are advised to look for more fine-grained approaches to reduce perceptions of unnecessarily burdensome rules, while realizing that a certain level of perceived red tape is likely an unavoidable part of bureaucratic functioning. The findings from this study show that merely being transparent about the rationale and process of a burdensome rule is not enough to reduce perceived red tape. Rather, policymakers and managers are advised to gain a better understanding of the different causes of red tape (disentangling genuine concerns from unfounded rhetoric), develop coherent strategies that adequately balance the trade-offs between organizational goals and citizen red tape, and be transparent about these trade-offs.