Do Computers Cut Red Tape?

American Review of Public Administration

Volumn 31, Issue 4, 2001, Pages 414-435

  Peled, Alon ^a  

^a HEBREW UNIVERSITY OF JERUSALEM   (Israel)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0345981389     PISSN: 02750740     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/02750740122065027     Document Type: Article

References (89)

1. Alic, J, A. (1990). Who designs work? Organizing production in an age of high technology. Technology in Society. 12, 310-317.
2. Badford. S. (1999, May 11). Capability bubbles-The vocabulary of the architecture. Available: http://www.faa.com.
3. Bekkers. V.J.J.M., & Zouridis. S. (1999). Electronic service delivery in public administration: Some trends and issues. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 65(2), 183-195.
4. Bellamy, C., & Taylor, J. A. (1997/1998). Understanding government.direct, Information infrastructure and policy. 6, 1-16.
5. Bloomfield. B, P., & Danieli, A. (1995). The role of management consultants in the development of information technology: The indissoluble nature of sociopolitical and technical skills, journal of Management Studies, 32, 23-46.
6. Boston, J. (1994, January). Purchasing policy advice: The limits of contracting out. Governance: An International Journal of Policy and Administration. 7, 1-30.
7. Boudreau. M. C. & Robey, R. (1996). Coping with contradictions in business process re-engineering. Information Technology & People, 9(4). 40-57.
8. Bozeman, B. (2000). Bureaucracy and red tape. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
9. Bretschneider, S, (1990). Management information systems in public and private organizations: An empirical test. Public Administration Review, 50(5), 536-545.
10. Bretschneider, S., & Wittmer, D. (1993). Organizational adoption of microcomputer technology: The role of sector. Information Systems Research, 4(1), 88-108.
11. Brint, S, (1990). Rethinking the policy influence of experts. Sociological Forum, 5, 361-385.
12. Brooks, F. P., Jr. (1995). The mythical man-month - Essays on software engineering [Anniversary edition]. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
13. Brown, M. M., & Brudney, J. L. (1998). A "smarter, better, faster, and cheaper" government: Contracting and geographic information systems. Public Administration Review, 58(4), 335-345.
14. Brudney, J. L., & Selden, S. C. (1995). The adoption of innovation by smaller local governments: The case of computer technology. American Review of Public Administration, 25(1). 71-86.
15. Bums, B. H. (1993). Technocracy at work. Albany: State University of New York Press.
16. Carroll, J. D., & Lynn, D. B. (1996, May-June). The future of federal reinvention: Congressional perspectives. Public Administration Review, 56(3), 299-304.
17. Collingride, D., & Margetts, H. (1994, Spring). Can government information systems be inflexible technology? The operational strategy revisited. Public Administration, 72, 55-72.
18. Dery. D. (1998). "Papereality" and learning in bureaucratic organizations. Administration & Society, 29(6), 677-689.
19. Durst, S. L., & Newell, D. (1999). Better, faster, stronger - Government reinvention in the 1990s. American Review of Public Administration, 29(1), 61 -76.
20. Fordham. R. (1990). Planning consultancy: Can it serve the public interest? Public Administration, 68, 243-248
21. Forester, T., & Morrison, P. (1994). Computer ethics (2nd ed.). Cambridge: MIT Press.
22. Frederickson, H. G. (1996). Comparing the reinventing government movement with the new public administration. Public Administration Review, 56(3), 263-270.
23. GAO. (1994a). Tax administration: IRS notices can be improved (Report No. GGD-95-6). Washington, DC: Author.
24. GAO. (1994b). HUD information resources: Strategic focus and improved management controls needed (Report No. AIMD-94-34). Washington, DC: Author
25. GAO. (1995). Tax administration: Sole proprietor identification numbers can be improved (Report No. GGD-95-160). Washington, DC: Author.
26. GAO. (1996a), Embedded computers: B-1B computers must be upgraded to support conventional requirements (Report No. AIMD-96-28). Washington, DC: Author.
27. GAO. (1996b). Regulatory burden: Measurement challenges and concerns raised by selected companies (Report No. GGD-97-2). Washington, DC: Author.
28. GAO. (1997a). High-risk series: Information management and technology (Report No. HR-97-9). Washington, DC: Author.
29. GAO. (1997b). Air traffic control: Complete and enforced architecture needed for FAA systems modernization (Report No. AIMD-97-30), Washington, DC: Author.
30. GAO. (1997c), High-risk program: Information on selected high-risk areas (Report No. HR-97-30). Washington, DC: Author.
31. GAO. (1997d). Defense IRM: Investments at risk for DOD computer centers (Report No. AIMD-97-39). Washington, DC: Author.
32. GAO. (1997e). Federal housing enterprises: OFHEO faces challenges in implementing a comprehensive oversight program (Report No. GGD-98-6). Washington, DC: Author.
33. GAO. (1997f). IRS svstems security: Tax processing operations and data still at risk due to serious weaknesses (Report No. AIMD-97-49). Washington, DC: Author.
34. GAO. (1997g). Acquisition reform: Classes of contracts not suitable for the federal acquisition computer network (Report No. NSIAD-97-232). Washington, DC: Author.
35. GAO, (1997h). Telemedicine: Federal strategy is needed to guide investments (Report No. NS1AD/HEHS-97-67), Washington, DC: Author.
36. GAO. (1998a). DOT's budget: Management and performance issues facing the department in fiscal year 1999 (Report No. T-RCED/AlMD-98-76). Washington, DC: Author.
37. GAO. (1998b). Air traffic control: Evolution and status of FAA's automation program (Report No. T-RCED/AIMD-98-85). Washington, DC: Author.
38. GAO. (1998c). Year 2000 computing crisis: Testing and other challenges confronting federal agencies (Report No. T-AIMD-98-218). Washington, DC: Author.
39. GAO. (1998d). Air traffic control: Observations on FAA's modernization program (Report No. T-RCED/AIMD-98-93). Washington, DC: Author.
40. GAO. (1998e). Information technology: Department of Energy does not effectively manage its supercomputers (Report No. RCED-98-208). Washington, DC: Author.
41. GAO. (1998f). Information security: Serious weaknesses place critical federal operations and assets at risk (Report No. AIMD-98-92). Washington, DC: Author.
42. GAO. (1998g). IRS systems security: Although significant improvements made, tax processing operations and data still at serious risk (Report No. AIMD-99-38). Washington, DC: Author.
43. GAO. (1998h). Air traffic control: Status of FAA's modernization program (Report No. RCED-99-25). Washington, DC: Author.
44. GAO. (1999a). High-risk series: An update (Report No. HR-99-1). Washington, DC: Author.
45. GAO. (1999b). Defense IRM: Alternatives should be considered in developing the new civilian personnel system (Report No. AIMD-99-20). Washington, DC: Author.
46. GAO. (1999c). Major management challenges and program risks: Department of Defense (Report No. OCG-99-4). Washington, DC: Author.
47. GAO, (1999d). Year 2000 computing crisis: Readiness improving but much work remains to ensure delivery of critical services (Report No. T-AIMD-99-149). Washington, DC: Author.
48. GAO. (1999e). Information security: The Melissa computer virus demonstrates urgent need for stronger protection over systems and sensitive data (Report No. T-AIMD-99-146). Washington, DC: Author.
49. GAO. (1999f). Information systems: The status of computer security at the Department of Veterans Affairs (Report No. AIMD-00-5). Washington, DC: Author.
50. GAO, (1999g). Information security: The proposed Computer Security Enhancement Act of 1999 (Report No. T-AIMD-99-302). Washington. DC: Author.
51. GAO. (2000a). Tax administration: Tracking taxpayer information about IRS notices could reduce burden (Report No. GGD-00-54). Washington. DC: Author.
52. GAO. (2000b). Social Security Administration: Year 2000 readiness efforts helped ensure century rollover and leap year success (Report No. AIMD-00-125). Washington, DC: Author.
53. GAO. (2000c). Information security: "ILOVEYOU" computer virus emphasizes critical need for agency and government-wide improvements (Report No, T-A1MD-00-I71). Washington, DC: Author.
54. Gill, T. (1995). Early expert systems: Where are they now? MIS Quarterly, 19, 51-68.
55. Gore, A. (1993). From red tape to results: Creating a government that works better and costs less, report of the national performance review. New York: Times Books/Random House.
56. Holstein, W. J., Lavelle. M., & Mulrine, A. (2000, August 14). I'm waiting for a jet plane. U.S. News & World Report. 31-38.
57. Hood, C. (1991). A public management for all seasons? Public Administration, 69(1), 3-19.
58. Integris Group. (1999). Struggling with IT: The growing complexity of information technology. Billerica, MA: Author.
59. IRS. (1999). Internal management document system handbook. In IRS handbook 2.2.1 (Section 2.2.1.1.2.2) [Online]. Retrieved August 2,2001, from the World Wide Web: http://www.irs.ustreas. gov/
60. IRS. (2000a). IDRS correspondence. In IRS handbook 102.11 (Sections 102.11.1.2.6 and 102.11.1.4) [Online]. Retrieved August 2, 2001, from the World Wide Web: http://www.irs.ustreas.gov/
61. IRS (2000b). IDRS terminal responses. In IRS Handbook 102.3 (Section 102.3.1.1.2) [Online]. Retrieved August 2, 2001, from the World Wide Web: http://www.irs.ustreas.gov/
62. IRS. (2000c). Information systems. In IRS Handbook (Section 2.1.7.3.5.5.2.7) [Online]. Retrieved August 2. 2001. from the World Wide Web: http://www.irs.ustreas.gov/
63. Kamensky, J. M. (1994). Role of the 'reinventing government' movement in federal management reform. Public Administration Review. 56(3), 247-255.
64. Kaufman, H. (1977). Red tape-Its origins, uses, abuses. Washington. DC: Brookings Institution.
65. Keil, M. (1995). Pulling the plug: Software project management and the problem of project escalation. MIS Quarterly, 19(4), 421-447.
66. Kraemer, K. L., & Dedrick. J. (1997). Computing and public organizations. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 7(1). 89-112.
67. Kraemer, K. L., & King, J. L. (1986). Computing in public organizations. Public Administration Review, 46. 488-496.
68. Landau, M, (1969). Redundancy, rationality, and the problem of duplication and overlap. Public Administration Review, 29, 346-358.
69. Latour, B. (1993). We have never been modern, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
70. Latour, B. (1999). Pandora 's hope-Essays on the reality of science studies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
71. Lenk, K. (1994). Information systems in public administration: From research to design. Informatization and the Public Sector, 3, 305-324.
72. Mani, B. G. (1995). Old wine in new bottles tastes better: A case study of TQM implementation in the IRS. Public Administration Review, 55(2). 147-158.
73. Mascarenhas. R. C. (1993). Building an enterprise culture in the public sector: Reform of the public sector in Australia, Britain, and New Zealand. Public Administration Review, 53(4), 319-328.
74. Monteiro. E., & Hanseth. O. (1996). Social shaping of information infrastructure: On being specific about the technology. In W. J. Orlikowski, G. Walsham, M. R. Jones, & J. I. DeGross (Eds.), Information technology and changes in organizational work (pp. 325-343). London: Chapman & Hall.
75. Moon, M. J. (1999). The pursuit of managerial entrepreneurship: Does organization matter? Public Administration Review, 59(1). 31 -43.
76. Muid, C. (1994). Information systems and new public management-A view from the centre. Public Administration, 72. 113-125.
77. Northrop, A., Kraemer, K. L., Dunkle, D. E. & King, J. L. (1990). Payoffs from computerization: Lessons over time. Public Administration Review, 50(5), 505-514.
78. Pandey, S., & Bretschneider, S. (1997). The impact of red tape's administrative delay on public organizations' interest in new information technologies. Journal for Public Administration Research and Theory, 7(1), 113-130.
79. Pape, T. C., & Thoresen, K. (1992). Evolutionary prototyping in a change perspective: A tale of three municipalities. Information Technology & People, 6(2-3), 145-170.
80. Peters, B. G., & Savoie. D. J. (1996). Managing incoherence: The coordination and empowerment conundrum. Public Administration Review. 56(3), 281-290.
81. Quindlen, T. (1992). IRS plans to start over or buy to take place of canceled CHEXAS. Government Computer News, 17, 10.
82. Rainey, H., Pandey, S., & Bozeman, B. (1995). Research note: Public and private managers' perceptions of red tape. Public Administration Review, 15(2), 207-242.
83. Saint-Martin, D. (1998). The new managerialism and the policy influence of consultants in government: An historical-institutionalist analysis of Britain, Canada, and France. Governance: An International Journal of Policy and Administration, 11(3). 319-356.
84. Serres. M., & Latour, B (1995). Conversations on science, culture, and time. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
85. Snellen, I. (1994). ICT: A revolutionizing force in public administration? Informatization and the Public Sector. 3, 283-304.
86. Starbuck, W. H. (1996). Unlearning ineffective or obsolete technologies. International Journal of Technology Management [Special issue], 11(7-8), 725-737.
87. Thompson, J. R. (1999). Devising administrative reform that works: The example of the reinvention lab program. Public Administration Review, 59(4). 283-292.
88. Wright. V. (1994). Reshaping the state: The implications for public administration. West European Politics, 17(3), 102-137.
89. Zuurmond, A.(1994). From bureaucracy to infocracy: A tale of two cities. Informatization and the Public Sector, 3, 189-204.