What does 25 years of experience tell us about the state of performance measurement in public policy and management?

Public Money and Management

Volumn 25, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 9-17

  Johnsen, Åge ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 12944268238     PISSN: 09540962     EISSN: 14679302     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9302.2005.00445.x     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Alford, J. and Baird, J. (1997), Performance monitoring in the Australian public services: A government-wide analysis. Public Money & Management, 17, 2, pp. 49-58.
2. Ball, R. and Monaghan, C. (1996), Performance review: The British experience. Local Government Studies, 22, 1, pp. 40-58.
3. Behn, R. D. (1995), The big questions of public administration. Public Administration Review, 55, 4, pp. 313-324.
4. Behn, R. D. (2003), Why measure performance? Different purposes require different measures. Public Administration Review, 63, 5, pp. 588-606.
5. Bogt, H. J. ter (2004), Politicians in search of performance information? Survey research on Dutch aldermen’s use of performance information. Financial Accountability & Management, 20, 3, pp. 221-252.
6. Boyne, G. (1997), Comparing the performance of local authorities: An evaluation of the Audit Commission indicators. Local Government Studies, 23, 4, pp. 17-53.
7. Breton, A. (1996), Competitive Governments: An Economic Theory of Politics and Public Finance (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge).
8. Brignall, S. and Modell, S. (2000), An institutional perspective on performance measurement and management in the ‘new public sector’. Management Accounting Research, 11, 3, pp. 281-306.
9. Carter, N., Klein, R. and Day, P. (1992), How Organizations Measure Success. The Use of Performance Indicators in Government (Routledge, London).
10. de Lancer Julnes, P. and Holzer, M. (2001), Promoting the utilization of performance measures in public organizations: An empirical study of factors affecting adoption and implementation. Public Administration Review, 61, 6, pp. 693-708.
11. Downs, A. (1957), An Economic Theory of Democracy (HarperCollins, New York).
12. Drucker, P. F. (1954), The Practice of Management (Harper Business, New York).
13. Dunleavy, P. and Hood, C. (1994), From old public administration to new public management. Public Money & Management, 14, 3, pp. 9-16.
14. Edwards, J. (1998), Local authority performance indicators: Dousing the fire of campaigning consumers? Local Government Studies, 24, 4, pp. 26-45.
15. Feldman, M. S. and March, J. G. (1981), Information in organizations as signal and symbol. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26, 2, pp. 171-186.
16. Hayek, F. (1945), The use of knowledge in society. American Economic Review, 35, 4, pp. 519-530.
17. Helden, G. J. van and Johnsen, Å. (2002), A comparative analysis of the development of performance-based management systems in Dutch and Norwegian local government. International Public Management Journal, 5, 1, pp. 75-95.
18. Hjern, B. and Porter, D. O. (1981), Implementation structures: A new unit of administrative analysis. Organization Studies, 2, 2/3, pp. 211-227.
19. Hyndman, N. S. and Eden, R. (2001), Rational management, performance targets and executive agencies: Views from agency chief executives in Northern Ireland. Public Administration, 79, 3, pp.579-598.
20. Jacobides, M. G. and Croson, D. C. (2001), Information policy: Shaping the value of agency relationships. Academy of Management Review, 26, 2, pp. 202-223.
21. Johnsen, A. (1999), Implementation mode and local government performance measurement: A Norwegian experience. Financial Accountability & Management, 15, 1, pp. 41-66.
22. Likierman, A. (1993), Performance indicators: 20 early lessons from managerial use. Public Money & Management, 13, 4, pp. 15-22.
23. Long, E. and Franklin, A. L. (2004), The paradox of implementing the Government Performance and Results Act: Top-down direction for bottom- up implementation. Public Administration Review, 64, 3, pp. 309-319.
24. Mayston, D. J. (1985), Non-profit performance indicators in the public sector. Financial Accountability & Management, 1, 1, pp. 51-74.
25. McKevitt, D. and Lawton, A. (1996), The manager, the citizen, the politician and performance measures. Public Money & Management, 16, 3, pp. 49-54.
26. Meyer, M. W. and Gupta, V. (1994), The performance paradox. Research in Organizational Behavior, 16, pp. 309-369.
27. Midwinter, A. (1994), Developing performance indicators for local government: The Scottish experience. Public Money & Management, 14, 2, pp. 37-43.
28. Moe, T. M. (1984), The new economics of organization. American Journal of Political Science, 28, pp. 739-777.
29. Norman, R. (2002), Managing through measurement or meaning? Lessons from experience with New Zealand’s public sector performance management systems. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 68, 4, pp.619-628.
30. Poister, T. H. and Streib, G. (1999), Performance measurement in municipal government: Assessing the state of practice. Public Administration Review, 59, 4, pp. 325-335.
31. Pollitt, C. (1988), Bringing consumers into performance measurement: Concepts, consequences and constraints. Policy & Politics, 16, 2, pp. 77-87.
32. Ridgeway, V. F. (1956), Dysfunctional consequences of performance measurement. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1 (September), pp. 240-247.
33. Schumpeter, J. A. (1950), Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, 3rd edn (Harper and Brothers, New York).
34. Simon, H. A. (1947/1997), Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision-Making Processes in Administrative Organizations, 4th edn (The Free Press, New York).
35. Smith, P. (1995), On the unintended consequences of publishing performance data in the public sector. International Journal of Public Administration, 18, 2/3, pp. 277-310.
36. Wittman, D. A. (1995), The Myth of Democratic Failure: Why Political Institutions are Efficient (University of Chicago Press, Chicago).