Table I

Correlates of theoretical predictions

	Intergovernmental representation	Supranational representation	Departmental representation	Epistemic representation
Formal organisation of the Commission
Specialisation by purpose	≠	≠	+	≠
Specialisation by process	≠	≠	≠	+
Formal rank	–	+	–	–
Multiple organisational embeddedness
compatible	+	–	+	+
incompatible	–	+	–	–
Commission affiliation
primary	–	+	≠	≠
secondary	+	–	≠	≠
Actor interaction inside the Commission
Intensive interaction	–	+	≠	≠
Sustained interaction	–	+	≠	≠
Educational background
international education	–	+	≠	+
national education	+	–	≠	–

key:

+ Positive correlation

– Negative correlation

≠ No predicted correlation

Table II

Percent of SNEs emphasising the following four loyalties (absolute numbers in parantheses)

	Fairly much or very much	Both/and	Fairly little or very little	Total
Intergovernmental loyalty:
Loyalty towards the member-states as a group	47	30	23	100 (66)
Supranational loyalty:
Loyalty towards the Commission as a whole	65	15	20	100 (66)
Loyalty towards the Director General of own DG	66	16	18	100 (67)
Departmental loyalty:
Loyalty towards the Director of own Directorate	78	12	10	100 (68)
Neutral enforcement of decisions and established regulations within the Commission	75	22	3	100 (64)
Epistemic loyalty:
Professional neutrality within own position	88	9	3	100 (65)

Table III

SNEs' perception of the representational roles evoked by other SNEs (percent - absolute numbers in parantheses)

	Strongly agree	Both/and	Strongly disagree	Total
A 'government representative' role	6	33	61	100 (69)
A 'Commission representative' role	39	53	8	100 (64)
A 'DG/Unit representative' role	74	22	5	100 (65)
An 'independent expert' role	74	20	6	100 (69)

Table IV

Percent of SNEs feeling an allegiance (identify or feel responsible to) towards the following (absolute numbers in parentheses)

	Fairly strongly or very strongly	Both/and	Fairly weakly or very weakly	Total
Intergovernmental allegiance:
The government of own country	5	19	77	100 (65)
Supranational allegiance:
The EU system as a whole	63	23	14	100 (64)
The Commission as a whole	69	22	9	100 (67)
Departmental allegiance:
The DG in which SNEs work	84	9	7	100 (68)
The Unit in which SNEs work	84	10	6	100 (68)
Epistemic allegiance:
Own professional (educational) background and expertise	76	16	8	100 (67)

Table V

Factors that relates to SNEs' perception of the representational roles evoked by other SNEs (Beta)^a

	A 'government representative' role	A 'Commission representative' role	A 'DG/Unit representative' role	An 'independent expert' role
Formal organisation of the Commission
Formal rank^b	.60**	-.16	-.30	-.42**
Multiple organisational embeddedness
Incompatible portfolios across levels of government^f	-.28	.29	.34	.65**
Actor interaction inside the Commission
Interaction with fellow colleagues with other national origins outside office^c	-.37*	-.02	0	0
Seniority within the Commission^d	-.07	.11	0	0
Educational background
International educational background^e	.18	-.12	0	.33*
	R²=.41	R²=.14	R²=.19	R²=.51

*) p<0.05

**) p<0.01

a) The dependent variables have the following values: Value 1 (strongly agree)), value 2 (do not know)), value 3 (strongly disagree).

b) This variable has the following values: Value 1 (A4 to A5), value 2 (A6 to A7), value 3 (A8), value 4 (scientific officer).

c) This variable has the following values: Value 1 (very often ), value 2 (fairly often), value 3 (both/and), value 4 (fairly seldom), value 5 (very seldom).

d) This variable is continuous ranging from 1 year to 11 years. (Secondment contracts have a maximum length of four years. However, some SNEs may renew their contracts beyond four years).

e) This variable is dichotomous by default: Value 1 (international university education), value 2 (national university education)

f) This variable has the following values: Value 1 (incompatible portfolio = previous professional occupation within domestic ministry or agency that do not correspond to current Commission portfolio), value 2 (compatible portfolio = previous professional occupation within domestic ministry or agency that correspond to current Commission portfolio).

Table VI

Summary of observed causal relationships

	Intergovernmental representation	Supranational representation	Departmental representation	Epistemic representation
Formal organisation of the Commission
Specialisation by purpose	≠	≠	+	≠
Specialisation by process	≠	≠	≠	+
Formal rank	(+)	+	–	–**
Multiple organisational embeddedness
compatible	+	–	(–)	(–)
incompatible	–	+	(+)	(+**)
Commission affiliation
primary	–	+	≠	≠
secondary	+	–	≠	≠
Actor interaction inside the Commission
Intensive interaction	–*	+	≠	≠
Sustained interaction	(≠)	(≠)	≠	≠
Educational background
international education	(≠)	(≠)	≠	+*
national education	(≠)	(≠)	≠	–

Key:

+ Positive correlation

– Negative correlation

≠ No correlation

( ) Non-predicted correlation

* p<0.05

** p<0.01