Integrative leadership in the public sector: A model of performance-information use

Administration and Society

Volumn 36, Issue 4, 2004, Pages 427-453

  Moynihan, Donald P ^a   Ingraham, Patricia Wallace ^b,c  

^a TEXAS A AND M UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Decision making; Leadership; Managing for results; Performance information

Indexed keywords

EID: 4043157745     PISSN: 00953997     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0095399704266748     Document Type: Article

References (65)

1. Argyris, C., & Schon, D. (1996). Organizational learning II: Theory, method, and practice. New York: Addison-Wesley.
2. Barzelay, M. (1998). Central audit institutions and performance auditing: A comparative analysis of organizational strategies in the OECD. Governance: An International Journal of Policy and Administration, 10(3), 235-260.
3. Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: Free Press.
4. Bennett, C., & Hill, H. (2002). Performance management systems: The importance of defining their purpose. Available at www.dpb.state.va.us/ VAResults/Material/PolicyService.pdf
5. Berry, F. S. (1994). Innovation in public management: The adoption of strategic planning. Public Administration Review, 54(4), 322-330.
6. Berry, W. D., Ringquist, E. J., Fording, R. C., & Hanson, R. L. (1998). Measuring citizen and government ideology in the United States. American Journal of Political Science, 42(1), 327-348.
7. Bretschneider, S. I., Gorr, W. L., Grizzle, G., & Klay, E. (1989). Political and organizational influences on the accuracy of forecasting state government revenues. International Journal of Forecasting, 5, 307-319.
8. Bretschneider, S. I., & Gorr, W. L. (1992). Economic, organizational, and political influences on biases in forecasting state sales tax receipts. International Journal of Forecasting, 7, 457-466.
9. Brewer, G. D. (1973). Politicians, bureaucrats, and the consultants. New York: Basic Books.
10. Brudney, J. L., Hebert, F. T., & Wright, D. S. (1999). Reinventing government in the American states: Measuring and explaining administrative reform. Public Administration Review, 59(1), 19-30.
11. Brudney, J. L., & Wright, D. S. (2001, August 30-September 2). Privatization across the American states: Assessing and explaining the scope of contracting by administrative agencies. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, San Francisco, CA.
12. Bullock, R. J., & Tibbs, M. E. (1987). The case meta-analysis for OD. Research in Organizational Change and Development, 1, 171-228.
13. Caplan, N. (1979). The two communities theory and knowledge use. American Behavioral Scientist, 22, 459-470.
14. Carmines, E. G., & Zeller, R. A. (1979). Reliability and validity assessment. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
15. Caro, R. (1974). The power broker: Robert Moses and the fall of New York. New York: Knopf.
16. Coggbum, J. D., & Schneider, S. (2003). The quality of management and government performance: An empirical analysis of the American states. Public Administration Review, 63(2), 206-213.
17. Cooper, J. (2001). The twentieth century congress. In L. C. Dodd & B. I. Oppenheimer (Eds.), Congress reconsidered (pp. 335-366). Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.
18. Council of State Governments. (2000). Book of states. Lexington, KY: Author.
19. De Lancer, J. P., & Holzer, M. (2001). Promoting the utilization of performance measures in public organizations. Public Administration Review, 61(6), 693-708.
20. Doig, J. W., & Hargrove, E. C. (Eds.). (1990). Leadership and innovation: Entrepreneurs in government. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.
21. Durant, R. F. (1999). The political economy of results-oriented management in the "neoadministrative state": Lessons from the MCDHHS experience. American Review of Public Administration, 29(4), 307-331.
22. Durant, R. F., Legge, J. S., & Moussios, A. (1998). People, profits, and service delivery: Lessons for the privatization of British Telecom. American Journal of Political Science, 42(1), 117-140.
23. Erikson, R. S., Wright, G. C., & Mclver, J. P. (1993). Statehouse democracy: Public opinion and policy in the American states. New York: Cambridge University Press.
24. Feldman, M. S. (1989). Order without design: Information production and policy making. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
25. Feldman, M. S., & March, J. G. (1981). Information as signal and symbol. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26, 171-186.
26. Fox, J. (1991). Regression diagnostics. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
27. Franklin, A. (2000). An examination of bureaucratic reaction to institutional controls. Public Performance and Management Review, 24(1), 8-21.
28. Hargrove, E. C., & Glidewell, J. G. (Eds.). (1990). Impossible jobs in public management. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
29. Hatry, H. (1999). Performance measurement: Getting results. Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press.
30. Heinrich, C. J. (1999). Do government bureaucrats make effective use of performance management information? Journal of Public Administration and Research Theory, 9(3), 363-393.
31. Hooijberg, R., & Choi, J. (2001). The impact of organizational characteristics on leadership effectiveness models: An examination of leadership in a private and a public sector organization. Administration & Society, 33(4), 403-431.
32. Huberman, M. (1983). Recipes for busy kitchens: A situational analysis of routine knowledge use in schools. Knowledge, 4, 478-510.
33. Inglehart, R., & Huber, J. (1995). Expert interpretations of party space and party placement in 42 societies. Party Politics, 1(1), 73-112.
34. Ingraham, P. W. (2001). Linking leadership to performance in public organizations. Paris: Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development.
35. Ingraham, P. W., & Donahue, A. E. (2000). Dissecting the black box revisited: Characterizing government management capacity. In C. J. Heinrich & L. E. Lynn Jr. (Eds.), Government and performance: New perspectives (pp. 292-319). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
36. Ingraham, P. W., & Moynihan, D. P. (2001). Beyond measurement: Managing for results in state government. In D. Forsythe (Ed.), Quicker, better, cheaper?: Managing performance in American government (pp. 309-335). Albany, NY: Rockefeller Institute Press.
37. Ingraham, P. W., Sowa, J. E., & Moynihan, D. P. (in press). Public sector integrative leadership: Linking leadership to performance in public organizations. In L. E. Lynn, Jr. & P. W. Ingraham (Eds.), Effective government. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
38. Johnson, J. D., Donahue, W. A., Atkin, C. K., & Johnson, J. (1995). A comprehensive model of information seeking. Science Communication, 16, 274-313.
39. Joyce, P. G., & Tompkins, S. (2002). Using performance information for budgeting: Clarifying the framework and investigating recent state experience. In K. Newcomer, E. Jennings, C. Broom, & A. Lomax (Eds.), Meeting the challenges of performance-oriented government (pp. 61-96). Washington, DC: American Society for Public Administration.
40. Knack, S. (2002). Social capital and the quality of government: Evidence from the U.S. states. American Journal of Political Science, 46(4), 772-785.
41. Lambright, W. H. (1995). Powering Apollo: James E. Webb of NASA. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
42. Larsson, R. (1993). Case survey methodology: Quantitative analysis of patterns across case studies. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 1515-1547.
43. March, J. G. (1987). Ambiguity and accounting: The elusive link between information and decision making. Accounting, Organizations, and Society, 12(2), 153-168.
44. Melkers, J. E., & Willoughby, K. G. (1998). The state of the states: Performance-based budgeting requirements in 47 out of 50. Public Administration Review, 58(1), 66-73.
45. Melkers, J. E., & Willoughby, K. G. (2001). Budgeters' views of state performance-budgeting systems: Distinctions across branches. Public Administration Review, 61(1), 54-64.
46. Mintzberg, H. (1977). Impediments to the use of management information. New York: National Association of Accountants.
47. Mintzberg, H. (1994, January-February). The fall and rise of strategic planning. Harvard Business Review, 72, 107-114.
48. Moore, M. (1995). Creating public value. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
49. Moynihan, D. P. (2001). The state of the states in managing for results (Alan K. Campbell Public Affairs Institute Working Paper). Available online at www.maxwell.syr.edu/gpp/pdfs/The_State_of_the_States_In_MFR.pdf
50. Moynihan, D. P., & Ingraham, P. W. (2003). Look for the silver lining: Managing for results in state government. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 13(4), 469-490.
51. Pierce, J. C., Lovrich, N., Tsurtomi, T., & Abe, T. (1987). Environmental policy elites trust of information sources. American Behavioral Scientist, 30, 250-270.
52. Radin, B. A. (2000). The Government Performance and Results Act and the tradition of federal management reform: Square pegs in round holes. Journal of Public Administration and Research Theory, 10(1), 111-135.
53. Rainey, H. (1997). Understanding and managing public organizations (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
54. Rainey, H., & Steinbauer, P. (1999). Galloping elephants: Developing elements of a theory of effective government organizations. Journal of Public Administration and Research Theory, 9(1), 1-32.
55. Rich, R. F. (1991). Knowledge creation, dissemination and utilization. Knowledge, 12, 319-330.
56. Ridley, C. E., & Simon, H. A. (1938). Measuring municipal activities: A survey of suggested criteria for appraising administration. Chicago: International City Managers Association.
57. Rossi, P., & Freeman, H. E. (1993). Evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
58. Selden, S. C., & Moynihan, D. P. (2000). A model of voluntary turnover in state government. Review of Public Personal Administration, 20(2), 63-75.
59. Simon, H. A. (1947). Administrative behavior. New York: Free Press.
60. Terry, L. D. (1998). Administrative leadership, neo-managerialism, and the new public management movement. Public Administration Review, 58(3), 194-201.
61. Snell, R., & Grooters, J. (2000). Goveming-for-results: Legislation in the states (A report to the Urban Institute). Available at www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/results-based-stategovt.pdf
62. Usilaner, B., & Soniat, E. (1980). Productivity measurement. In G. Washnis (Ed.), Productivity improvement handbook for state and local government (n.p.). New York: John Wiley.
63. U.S. General Accounting Office. (1999, July). Managing for results: Opportunities for continued improvements in agencies' performance plans (GAO/AIMD-99-215). Washington, DC: Author.
64. Weiss, C. E., & Bucuvalas, M. J. (1980). Social science research and decision-making. New York: Columbia University Press.
65. Wildavsky, A. (1975). Budgeting: A comparative theory of budgeting processes. Boston: Little, Brown.