Pressure on judges: How managerialisation and evolving professional standards affect judges' autonomy, efficiency and stress

In recent decades, many judicial systems have witnessed the “managerialisation” of justice—a phenomenon involving the application of private sector techniques to enhance court functioning. These techniques encompass engaging professional managers, reorganizing services, implementing performance measures, and adopting performance-based budgeting. Balancing these approaches with judges’ professional standards, as independence and quality, raises critical questions. How does managerialisation affect judges’ organization, autonomy, work quality, efficiency, and work-related stress? A survey conducted from June to December 2020 among first-instance judges in Finland, Italy, and the Netherlands, with distinct budgeting models, aimed to understand the impact. The questionnaire explored pressure sources, perceived stress levels, and mechanisms mitigating pressure and stress. Results showed significant differences in work organization, performance targets, and judge autonomy. However, similarities emerged in perceived pressure, work-related stress, and motivation. The study suggests that while not a panacea, managerialisation doesn’t inherently increase pressure and stress. It may improve court organization, clarifying the interplay between professional standards and financial considerations.