Los cuatro rostros del gobierno: Un estudio de métodos mixtos sobre arquetipos de gestión y creación de valor público para MIPYMES

Objective: It was investigated how and under what institutional conditions the integration of digital capabilities, coherence, and service quality contributed to building the legitimacy of local governments before micro, small, and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs) in Mexico. The aim was to fill the gap in integrative models on public value creation in this segment. Methodology: A sequential explanatory mixed methods design (QUAN → qual) was applied. In the quantitative phase, a causal model was tested using PLS-SEM with an online survey (55 items, 5-point Likert scale) on a sample of N = 169 SMEs. This survey was complemented with exploratory factor analysis and reliability. In the qualitative phase, 16 semi-structured interviews were conducted with officials from different levels and areas, analyzed through reflective thematic analysis to explain and expand the results. Results: The structural model showed that governmental coherence and coordination was the strongest predictor of perceived legitimacy and performance (β = 0.512), surpassing digital sophistication and capacity (β = 0.275); in turn, digital sophistication was mainly associated with the quality and utility of the service (β = 0.489). The qualitative component explained these patterns through four management archetypes: Four types of roles were identified: strategic manager, relational political operator, sector technician, and frontline agent. These roles show tensions between the technical and the political, fragmentation within institutions, root causes, and the relevance of psychosocial support. Conclusions: It was concluded that effective public innovation did not depend on isolated capacities, but rather on the alignment of action logics thru institutional coherence; the archetype model provided an applicable explanatory framework to guide coordination strategies, frontline training, and the design of human-centered interventions, and it was suggested to validate the model in other contexts and develop quantitative measures of psychosocial support as a possible mediator.