PTWhat helps in interpreting a traffic rule
Laws, resolutions, ordinances, service orders: officers at DETRAN-PR, the Paraná traffic department, use them to issue a driver's licence or register a vehicle. With 155 officers across the state, the thesis measures what is linked to more or less difficulty reading them: learning, contacts, balancing the new with routine, and the text of the rule itself. Explained in 12 screens.
The same rule can turn into different answers
Every DETRAN-PR unit applies the same rules. But a rule that is ambiguous, changes all the time or is full of exceptions leaves room for each officer to read it differently, and citizens get different answers. The thesis lists the reasons. Tap one:
Our illustration: the request and the answers are made up. The reasons come from the thesis introduction (section 1.1). During the pandemic, in-person service stopped, cases piled up and queues grew (G1 Paraná, 2021, cited in the thesis).
Three personal capacities and the text of the rule
The thesis applies to the officer three ideas first developed to study companies: absorptive capacity (recognising, assimilating and applying new knowledge), social capital (ties inside and outside the agency) and ambidexterity (exploring the new without losing routine efficiency). It also asks how much the text of the rule gets in the way. Tap a block:
Height = number of questions in the questionnaire (Appendix B). Scales by Wang and colleagues (absorptive capacity), Ben-Hador and colleagues, adapted by Albano (social capital), and Popadiuk and Nishimura (ambidexterity); those for the text of the rule and for difficulty were created by the author. The questionnaire also asked about the workplace (10 items) and motivation (15).
155 officers in an agency the author knows from the inside
The author works at DETRAN-PR. With the agency's permission, she sent a questionnaire to the work e-mail of the traffic activity officers in Paraná's 101 regional units (CIRETRANs), after testing it with ten colleagues.
Sections 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3.7. About 27% of the target group answered (our calculation). The number was above the minimum the author calculated for the statistical tests.
Percentages from Table 1; people per group = percentage × 155, rounded (our calculation).
Answer like an officer
Six real statements from the questionnaire, from 1 to 6. Replace "DETRAN-PR" with the place where you work. The officers' mean appears after you answer.
Items AAS1, AID2, CSFDO1, CSLID3, INO8 and EFIC3 (Appendix B); means from Tables 2, 3 and 4.
Officers exchange a lot with colleagues and say they have little influence
Across the three capacities, the means sit above the middle of the scale. The exception is social capital: officers have good friends and trust their colleagues, but hardly see themselves as linked to influential people, inside or outside the agency. Switch the capacity and tap a bar:
Means from 1 to 6: the floor is 1 (strongly disagree) and the hollow box goes up to 6 (strongly agree). Tables 2, 3 and 4. For the parts of social capital where the table gives no group mean, the mean of the questions is our calculation.
Vague terms and lack of training top the list of what gets in the way
The questionnaire asked how much each thing harms the correct interpretation of a rule. Before you look, a guess: what do you think gets in the way most?
Stated difficulty by type of rule was low (means from 2.1 to 2.5): officers say they are comfortable with laws and ordinances, but point to what in the text and at work gets in the way. Tables 5 to 8. Each question has its own scale: compare only within the same question.
Absorptive capacity is linked to every other piece
The thesis tested ten links at once (structural equations). Absorptive capacity is linked to the other capacities and to less difficulty. The text that gets in the way is linked to more difficulty. Ambidexterity and outside ties make no clear difference. Tap an arrow:
Standardised coefficients (β) from SmartPLS 4, Table 13 and Figure 28. Thickness ∝ β; dashed = not significant. The outcome is stated difficulty: a negative sign means less difficulty. R² = how much of the differences among officers the model explains.
The text of the rule weighs more than any trait of the officer
With only the officer's capacities, the model explains about 10% of the differences in difficulty. When how much the text of the rule gets in the way (vague terms, badly worded sentences, multiple meanings) is added, the explanation almost triples. Switch the text on and off:
Height = size of the coefficient (β), without the sign; ↑ = more difficulty, ↓ = less. Without the text: Figure 27 (significant links only). With the text: Table 13 and Figure 28; grey = not significant. The cup goes up to 100%.
Officers with more ties in the agency reported slightly more difficulty
The hypothesis was that good contacts inside DETRAN would help in interpreting the rules. In the data, the link is small and goes the other way: more internal social capital, slightly more stated difficulty. Move the three factors that held up and see the total:
β from Table 13 times how much you moved each factor (in standard deviations), added up: an illustrative reading, with everything else equal. An association at a single point in time, not proof of cause.
Not every bet of the research held up
Before collecting the data, the author bet that each capacity would help. Place your bets and flip the cards. On the back, a case the author experienced at DETRAN-PR.
Hypotheses from section 2 and results from Table 13. The cases come from the discussion, where the author comments on each hypothesis with her experience at the agency.
Train those who read and write better what is read
For the author, ongoing training for officers can be an effective strategy to develop absorptive capacity and improve the service to society. The data point to another target: the text of the rules itself.
For DETRAN and other agencies
- Regular training and workshops on new rules, according to the author. Today there is no regular programme: from time to time, officers take online courses from the Paraná state school of government.
- Lack of training was what got in the way most in the workplace (4.30).
For those who write rules
- Vague terms (4.13) and badly worded sentences (4.03) top what gets in the way in the text.
- In the model, a confusing text was the largest link to difficulty. Clear, well-defined rules, the author says, are essential for consistent interpretation.
For officers
- Talking to colleagues about a new rule was the highest answer on absorptive capacity (5.07).
- The author suggests discussion groups and support networks among officers to make readings consistent; the research did not measure the effect of these groups.
What this research does not say
- One agency, one state. Only DETRAN-PR officers; other agencies and regions may differ. · according to the author
- Closed questionnaire. Fixed answers miss the nuances; the author suggests interviews and focus groups. · according to the author
- Stated, not measured, difficulty. Officers say how much difficulty they feel; the research did not test whether they interpret the rule correctly. · our observation
- A single point in time. Everything was asked in the same questionnaire: it shows what goes together, not what causes what, nor the direction. · our observation
- Much remains unexplained. The model explains 29% of the differences in difficulty; about 71% depend on other things. · our observation, with the R² in Table 9
Credits
NEVES, Genailda Ramos. Capacidade de absorção, capital social e ambidestria individual sob o contexto de interpretação de normativas de trânsito. Doctoral thesis (Business Administration) — Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie, São Paulo, 2024. Advisor: Prof. Dr. Silvio Popadiuk.
Thesis approved on 17 December 2024. Research authorised by DETRAN-PR. The author thanks the partnership with União Dinâmica das Cataratas (UDC); the consent form mentions the inter-institutional doctorate (DINTER). Data analysed in SmartPLS 4. This version simplifies the work for the general public.