Performance measurement: A remedy for increasing the efficiency of public services?

International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management

Volumn 55, Issue 6, 2006, Pages 448-465

  Greiling, Dorothea ^a  

^a Evangelische Fachhochschule Darmstadt   (Germany)

Author keywords

Bureaucracy; Economics research; Performance measurement (quality); Public administration; Public sector organizations

Indexed keywords

EID: 33746367110     PISSN: 17410401     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1108/17410400610682488     Document Type: Review

References (43)

1. De Bruijn, H. (2002), Managing Performance in the Public Sector, Routledge, London and New York, NY.
2. DiMaggio, P.I. and Powell, W.W. (1991), “Introduction”, in Powell, W.W. and DiMaggio, P.J. (Eds), The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, pp. 1-38.
3. Dole, J. (2002), “The budget-minimizing bureaucrat?”, Public Administration Review, Vol. 62 No. 1, pp. 42-50.
4. Eisenhardt, K.M. (1989), “Agency theory: an assessment and review”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 57-74.
5. Gianakis, G.A. (2002), “The promise of public sector performance measurement: anodyne or placebo?”, Public Administration Quarterly, Vol. 26, pp. 34-64.
6. Greenwood, R. and Higgins, C.R. (1998), “Organizational design types, tracks and the dynamics of strategic change”, Organization Studies, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 293-316.
7. Greiling, D. (2005), “Performance measurement in the public sector: the German experience”, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 54 No. 7, pp. 551-67.
8. Halachmi, A. (2005), “Performance measurement: test the water before you dive in”, International Review on Administrative Sciences, Vol. 71 No. 2, pp. 255-66.
9. HM Treasury (2003), Meeting the Productivity Challenge: A Discussion Paper, HMSO, London.
10. Hodge, G. (1998), “Contracting public services: A meta-analytic perspective of international evidence”, Australian Journal of Public Administration, Vol. 57, pp. 98-110.
11. Hodge, G. (2000), Privatization: An International Review of Performance, Westview Press, Boulder, CO.
12. Holmstrom, B. and Milgrom, P. (1991), “Multitask principal-agent analyses: incentive contracts, asset ownership and job”, Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Vol. 7, Supplement, pp. S.24-S.52.
13. Jacobides, M.G. and Croson, D.C. (2001), “Information policy: shaping the value of agency relationships”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 202-23.
14. Jain, A. (2004), “Using the lens of Max Weber's theory of bureaucracy to examine E-government research”, Proceedings of the 37th Hawaii International Conference on System Science, IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, pp. 1-10.
15. Johnsen, A. (2005), “What does 25 years of experience tell us about the state of performance measurement in public management and policy?”, Public Money and Management, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 9-17.
16. Johnson, R.N. and Libecap, G.D. (1989), “Agency growth, salaries and the protected bureaucrat”, Economic Enquiry, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 431-52.
17. Kirsch, W. (1997), Kommunikatives Handeln, Autopoiese, Rationalität: kritische Aneignungen im Hinblick auf eine evolutionäre Organisationstheorie, 2nd ed., Hampp Verlag, Herrsching.
18. Kondra, A.Z. and Higgins, C.R. (1998), “Organizational diversity and change in institutional theory”, Organization Studies, Vol. 9 No. 5, pp. 743-6.
19. Kuhlmann, S. (2004), “Interkommunale Leistungsvergleiche in Deutschland: zwischen Transparenzgebot und Politikprozess”, in Kuhlmann, S., Bogumil, J. and Wollmann, H. (Eds), Leistungsmessung und -vergleich in Politik und Verwaltung, VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden, pp. 94-120.
20. Lawton, A., McKevitt, D. and Millar, M. (2000), “Coping with ambiguity: reconciling external legitimacy and organizational implementation in performance measurement”, Public Money & Management, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 13-19.
21. Leibenstein, H. (1966), “Allocative efficiency and X-efficiency”, American Economic Review, Vol. 56, pp. 392-415.
22. McGuire, T.A. (1981), “Budget-maximizing governmental agencies: an empirical test”, Public Choice, Vol. 36, pp. 313-22.
23. Meyer, J.W. and Rowan, B. (1977), “Institutionalized organizations: formal structure as myth and ceremony”, American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 83, pp. 340-63.
24. Meyer, J.W. and Scott, W.R. (1983), Organizational Environments: Ritual and Rationality, Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, CA.
25. Meyer, M.W. (2002), Rethinking Performance Measurement, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
26. Migué, J.L. and Bélanger, G. (1974), “Towards a general theory of managerial discretion”, Public Choice, Vol. 7, pp. 27-32.
27. Modell, S. (2004), “Performance measurement myth in the public sector: a research note”, Financial Accountability and Management, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 39-56.
28. Niskanen, W.A. (1968), “Nonmarket decision making: the peculiar economics of bureaucracy”, American Economic Review, Vol. 58 No. 2, pp. 293-305.
29. Niskanen, W.A. (1971), Bureaucracy and Representative Government, Aldine, New York, NY.
30. Norman, R. (2004), “Recovering from a tidal wave: new directions for performance management in New Zealand's public sector”, Public Finance and Management, Vol. 4, pp. 429-47.
31. OECD (2005), Performance-related Pay Policies for Government Employees, OECD, Paris.
32. Osborne, D. and Gaebler, T. (1993), Reinventing Government: How the Entrepreneurial Spirit Is Transforming the Public Sector, Penguin Books, New York, NY.
33. Prendergast, C. (1999), “The provision of incentives in firms”, Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 37, March, pp. 7-63.
34. Radnor, Z. (2005), “Developing a typology of organisational gaming”, paper presented at the EGPA Conference, Berne 2005, publication forthcoming.
35. Reid, T.E. and Abide, M.O. (1979), “The role of performance information in improving the management of public programs”, Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Vol. 50, pp. 3-23.
36. Roy, C. and Séguin, F. (2000), “The institutionalization of efficiency-oriented approaches for public service improvement”, Public Performance & Management Review, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 449-68.
37. Sigelman, L. (1986), “The bureaucrat as budget maximizer: an assumption examined”, Public Budgeting & Finance, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 50-9.
38. Ulrich, P. (1999), “‘Was ist gute’ Unternehmensführung? Zur normativen Dimension der Shareholder-Stakeholder-Debatte”, in Kumar, B.J., Osterloh, M. and Schreyögg, G. (Eds), Unternehmensethik und die Transformation des Wettbewerbs, Poeschel, Stuttgart.
39. Wang, X. and Berman, E. (2001), “Hypotheses about performance measurement in counties: findings from a survey”, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 403-28.
40. Weber, M. (1972), Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, 5th ed., Mohr, Tübingen.
41. Williams, D.W. (2003), “Measuring government in the early 20th century”, Public Administration Review, Vol. 63 No. 6, pp. 643-59.
42. Wilson, J.Q. (2000), Bureaucracy, Basic Books, New York, NY.
43. Wintrobe, R. (1997), “Modern bureaucratic theory”, in Mueller, D.C. (Ed.), Perspectives of Public Choice, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, New York, NY and Melbourne, pp. 429-54.