Accounting for the value of performance measurement from the perspective of midwestern mayors

Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory

Volumn 16, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 217-237

  Ho, Alfred Tat Kei ^a  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33645165444     PISSN: 10531858     EISSN: 14779803     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/jopart/mui046     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Ammons, David N. 1994. The role of professional associations in establishing and promoting performance standards for local government. Public Productivity and Management Review 17(3): 281-98.
2. _. 2001. Municipal benchmarks: Assessing local performance and establishing community standards. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
3. Berman, Evan, and Xiaohu Wang. 2000. Performance measurement in U.S. counties: Capacity for reform. Public Administration Review 60 (5): 409-20.
4. Bouckaert, Geert. 1993. Measurement and meaningful management. Public Productivity and Management Review 17 (1): 321-43.
5. Broom, Cheryle, Marilyn Jackson, Jody Harris, and Vera Vogelsang-Coombs. 1998. Performance measurements: Concepts and techniques. 3d ed. Washington, DC: Center for Accountability and Performance, the American Society for Public Administration.
6. Broom, Cheryle, and Lynne A. McGuire. 1995. Performance-based government models: Building a track record. Public Budgeting and Finance 15 (4): 3-17.
7. Bureau of Municipal Research of New York. 1915. The citizen and the government: A statement of policy and method. Municipal Research 57:1-4.
8. Cope, Glen. 1995. Budgeting for performance in local government: The municipal yearbook, 1995. Washington, DC: International City/County Management Association.
9. Friedman, Lewis. 1979. Performance budgeting in American cities. Public Productivity Review 3(4): 50-51.
10. Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB). 1994. Concepts statement no. 2: Service efforts and accomplishments reporting. Norwalk, CT: GASB.
11. _. 1997. Report on survey of state and local government use and reporting of performance measures: First questionnaire results. http://www.seagov.org/ sea_gasb_project/1997_Survey.pdf (accessed February 4, 2005).
12. _. 2002a. Performance measurement at the state and local levels: A summary of survey results. http://www.seagov.org/sea_gasb_project/1998_Survey. pdf (accessed February 4, 2005).
13. _. 2002b. Report on the GASB citizen discussion groups on performance reporting. Norwalk, CT: GASB.
14. Grizzle, Gloria A., and Carole D. Pettijohn. 2002. Implementing performance-based program budgeting: A system-dynamics perspective. Public Administration Review 62 (1): 51-62.
15. Hatry, Harry P. 1999. Performance measurement: Getting results. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
16. Hatry, Harry P., Louis H. Blair, Donald M. Fisk, John H. Greier, John R. Hall Jr., and Philip S. Schaenman. 1977. How effective are your community services? Procedures for monitoring the effectiveness of municipal services. Washington, DC: Urban Institute and International City Management Association.
17. Hatry, Harry P., and Donald M. Fisk. 1971. Improving productivity and productivity measurement in local governments. Paper prepared for the National Commission on Productivity. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
18. Ho, Alfred T. 2003. Perceptions of performance measurement and the practice of performance reporting by small cities. State and Local Government Review 35 (3): 161-73.
19. Ho, Alfred T., and Paul Coates. 2002. Citizen participation: Legitimizing performance measurement as a decision tool. Government Finance Review 18 (2): 8-10.
20. International City/County Management Association (ICMA). 2001. Comparative performance measurement: FY2000 data report. Washington, DC: ICMA.
21. Jordan, Meagan, and Merl Hackbart. 1999. Performance budgeting and performance funding in the states: A status assessment. Public Budgeting and Finance 19(1): 68-88.
22. Joyce, Phil. 1993. Using performance measures for federal budgeting: Proposals and prospects. Public Budgeting and Finance 13 (4): 3-17.
23. Julnes, Patria de Lancer, and Marc Holzer. 2001. Promoting the utilization of performance measures in public organizations: An empirical study of factors affecting adoption and implementation. Public Administration Review 61 (6): 693-708.
24. Keller, Gerald, and Brian Warrack. 2003. Statistics for management and economics. 6th ed. Pacific Grove, CA: Thomson.
25. Larkey, Patrick D., and Erik A. Devereux. 1999. Good budgetary decision processes. In Public management reform and innovation: Research, theory, and applications, ed. H. G. Frederickson and J. M. Johnston. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.
26. Lauth, Thomas P. 1985. Performance evaluation in the Georgia budgetary process. Public Budgeting and Finance 5:67-82.
27. Lee, Robert. 1997. A quarter century of state budgeting practices. Public Administration Review 57 (2): 133-40.
28. Meekings, Alan. 1995. Unlocking the potential of performance measurement: A practical implementation guide. Public Money and Management 15 (4): 5-12.
29. Meier, Kenneth J., and Jeffrey L. Brudney. 2002. Applied statistics for public administration. 5th ed. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt College Publishers.
30. Melkers, Julia, and Katherine Willoughby. 2001. Budgeters' views of state performance-budgeting systems: Distinctions across branches. Public Administration Review 61 (1): 54-64.
31. Moynihan, Donald P., and Patricia W. Ingraham. 2001. When does performance information contribute to performance information use? Putting the factors in place. Working paper, Campbell Public Affairs Institute, Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs, Syracuse University.
32. Osborne, David, and Ted Gaebler. 1992. Reinventing government: How the entrepreneurial spirit is transforming the public sector. New York: Penguin Books.
33. Poister, Theodore H., and Gregory D. Streib. 1999. Performance measurement in municipal government: Assessing the state of the practice. Public Administration Review 59 (4): 325-35.
34. Public Administration Service. 1937. The work unit in federal administration. Chicago: Public Administration Service.
35. Richards, Craig E., and Mawlimu Shujaa. 1990. School performance incentives. In Teachers and their workplace, ed. Pedro Reyes. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
36. Robinson, Marc. 2002. Best practice in performance budgeting. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Association for Budgeting and Financial Management, Kansas City, MO.
37. Sample, V. Alaric. 1992. Resource planning and budgeting for national forest management. Public Administration Review 52 (4): 339-46.
38. Sharp, Terry. 2001. Linking performance measurement to budgeting. Government Finance Review 17(2): 15-18.
39. Steinberg, Harold I. 1996. The time has come: The hour is at hand. AGA Journal 44 (4): 26-30.
40. Streib, Gregory D., and Theodore H. Poister. 1999. Assessing the validity, legitimacy, and functionality of performance measurement systems in municipal governments. American Review of Public-Administration 29 (2): 107-23.
41. Theurer, Jim 1998. Seven pitfalls to avoid when establishing performance measures. Public Management 80 (7): 21-24.
42. Tracy, Richard, and Ellen P. Jean. 1993. Measuring government performance: Experimenting with service efforts and accomplishments reporting in Portland, Oregon. Government Finance Review 9 (6): 11-14.
43. U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO). 1997. Performance budgeting: Past initiatives offer insights for GPRA implementation. GAO/AIMD-97-46. Washington, DC: GAO.
44. _. 2000. Managing for results: Emerging benefits from selected agencies' use of performance agreements. GAO report GAO-01-115. Washington, DC: GAO.
45. Wang, Xiaohu. 2000. Performance measurement in budgeting: A study of county governments. Public Budgeting and Finance 20 (3): 102-18.
46. Wang, Xiaohu, and Evan Berman. 2000. Hypotheses about performance measurement in counties: Findings from a survey. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 11 (3): 403-28.
47. Wholey, Joseph S., and Harry P. Hatry. 1992. The case for performance monitoring. Public Administration Review 52 (6): 604-10.
48. Williams, Daniel W. 2003. Measuring government in the early twentieth century. Public Administration Review 63 (6): 643-59.
49. Willoughby, Katherine G. 2002. Performance measurement utility in public budgeting: Application in state and local governments. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Association for Budgeting and Financial Management, Kansas City, MO.
50. Willoughby, Katherine G., and Julia E. Melkers. 2000. Implementing PBB: Conflicting views of success. Public Budgeting and Finance 20 (1): 105-20.
51. _. 2001. Assessing the impact of performance budgeting: A survey of American states. Government Finance Review 17 (2): 25-30.