Policy implementation gap is one of the major problems confronting both developed and developing countries. Among a number of implementation models proposed to explain the problems during policy implementation stage is the theory of street-level bureaucracy. This research also aims to contribute to the understanding of the “street-level bureaucracy” phenomenon. However, rather than analyzing the traditional street-level workers as proposed in Lipsky’s work, this paper focus on another subject of street-level bureaucracy: the frontline managers. The rationale behind this is that frontline managers, in order to cope with the pressure of their working environment and sustain their interest, also exercise discretion in their work. It would be unjustified to consider frontline managers the same as any other types of managers in the organization.
To analyze whether this argument is valid, the research is conducted using a case study about a province in Vietnam. The target policies in this study are alcohol-related one. In-depth interviews and document review are the primary data sources. The study found out that the frontline managers did exercise discretion when implementing policy. They could choose light penalties for the violators, ignore minor violations of the laws, or decide not to apply the policies depending on the situation. Similar to frontline bureaucrats, frontline managers are also under various influential factors such as the direction from the upper-level, limited resources, and the knowledge and attitude of the implementers towards the policies applied. One factor emerged from this research is the impact of local people in policy implementation, which takes the form of social power. The finding of this research presents implications for practice in terms of understanding and mediating the role of frontline managers in the policy process. Public management and implementation processes should give recognition to the special role of frontline managers, being managers and practitioners at the same time
