The demand side of performance measurement: Explaining councillors' utilization of performance information in policymaking

International Public Management Journal

Volumn 12, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 24-47

  Askim, Jostein ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OSLO   (Norway)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 58849160481     PISSN: 10967494     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10967490802649395     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Askim, J. (2007) How Do Politicians Use Performance Information? An Analysis of the Norwegian Local Government Experience. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 73:3, pp. 453-472.
2. Askim, J. (2007) Local Government by Numbers: Who Makes Use of Performance Information, When, and for What Purposes?, Unipub, Oslo
3. Askim, J. and Hanssen, G. S. (2008) Councillors' Receipt and Use of Citizen Input: Experience from Norwegian Local Government. Public Administration, 86:2, pp. 387-409.
4. Askim, J., Johnsen, Å. and Christophersen, K. A. (2008) Factors Behind Organizational Learning from Benchmarking: Experiences from Norwegian Municipal Benchmarking Networks. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18:2, pp. 297-320.
5. Behn, R. (2003) Why Measure Performance? Different Purposes Require Different Measures. Public Administration Review, 635, pp. 586-606.
6. Bogt, H. J. (2001) Politicians and Output-oriented Performance Evaluation in Municipalities. The European Accounting Review, 10:3, pp. 621-643.
7. Bogt, H. J. (2003) Performance Evaluation Styles in Governmental Organizations: How do Professional Managers Facilitate Politicians' Work?. Management Accounting Research, 14:4, pp. 311-332.
8. Bogt, H. J. (2004) Politicians in Search of Performance Information? Survey Research on Dutch Aldermen's Use of Performance Information. Financial Accountability and Management, 20:3, pp. 221-252.
9. Bouckaert, G. and Halligan, J. (2006) Handbook of Public Policy, pp. 443-460. Sage, London
10. Bretschneider, S., Gorr, W. L., Grizzle, G. and Klay, E. (1989) Political and Organizational Influences on the Accuracy of Forecasting State Government Revenues. International Journal of Forecasting, 5:3, pp. 307-319.
11. Carter, N., Klein, R. and Day, P. (1992) How Organizations Measure Success. The Use of Performance Indicators in Government, Routledge, London
12. Cyert, R. M. and March, J. G. (1992) A Behavioral Theory of the Firm, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ
13. Dekker, S. and Hansen, D. (2004) Learning Under Pressure: The Effect of Politicization on Organizational Learning in Public Bureaucracies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 14:2, pp. 211-230.
14. Denrell, J. and March, J. G. (2001) Adaptation as Information Restriction: The Hot Stove Effect. Organization Science, 12:5, pp. 523-538.
15. Dunleavy, P. (1991) Democracy, Bureaucracy and Public Choice, Harvester Wheatsheaf, London
16. Goldsmith, M. and Larsen, H. (2004) Local Political Leadership: Nordic Style. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 28:1, pp. 121-133.
17. Greve, H. (2003) Organizational Learning from Performance Feedback: A Behavioral Perspective on Innovation and Change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK
18. Hood, C. (2006) Gaming in Targetworld: The Target Approach to Managing British Public Services. Public Administration Review, 66:4, pp. 515-521.
19. Hood, C. (2007) Public Service Management by Numbers: Why Does it Vary? Where Has it Come From? What Are the Gaps and the Puzzles?. Public Money & Management, 27:2, pp. 95-102.
20. Hood, C. and Margetts, H. Z. (2007) The Tools of Government in the Digital Age, Palgrave Macmillan, New York
21. Jackson, A. (2007) Falling from a Great Height: Principles of Good Practice in Performance Measurement and the Perils of Top Down Determination of Performance Indicators. Local Government Studies, 31:1, pp. 21-38.
22. Jacobsen, D. I. (2003) Vi har det så Greit: En Studie av Forholdet Mellom Politikk og Administrasjon i 30 Norske Kommuner, Makt-og demokratiutredningens rapportserie, Report no. 66. Oslo
23. Jensen, M. and Meckling, W. (1976) Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behaviour, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3:4, pp. 305-360.
24. Johnsen, Å. (2005) What Does 25 Years of Experience Tell Us About the State of Performance Measurement in Public Management and Policy?. Public Money & Management, 25:1, pp. 9-17.
25. Johnsen, Å. and Vakkuri, J. (2006) Is There a Nordic Perspective on Public Sector Performance Measurement?. Financial Accountability & Management, 22:3, pp. 291-308.
26. Johnson, J. D., Donahue, W. A., Atkin, C. K. and Johnson, J. (1995) A Comprehensive Model of Information Seeking. Science Communication, 16:3, pp. 274-313.
27. Kaplan, R. S. and Norton, D. P. (1996) The Balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy into Action, Harvard Business School Press, Boston
28. Kaplan, R. S. and Norton, D. P. (2001) The Strategy-focused Organization: How Balanced Scorecard Companies Thrive in the New Business Environment, Harvard Business School Press, Boston
29. Knott, J. H. and Hammond, T. (2003) Handbook of Public Administration, pp. 138-148. Sage Publications, London
30. Lægreid, P., Roness, P. G. and Rubecksen, K. (2006) Performance Management in Practice: The Norwegian Way. Financial Accountability and Management, 22:3, pp. 251-270.
31. Levitt, B. and March, J. G. (1988) Organizational Learning. Annual Review of Sociology, 14, pp. 319-340.
32. March, J. G. (1988) Decisions and Organizations, Blackwell, Oxford
33. Mausolff, C. (2004) Learning from Feedback in Performance Measurement Systems. Public Performance & Management Review, 28:1, pp. 9-29.
34. Melkers, J. and Willoughby, K. G. (2005) Models of Performance-measurement Use in Local Governments: Understanding Budgeting, Communication, and Lasting Effects. Public Administration Review, 65:2, pp. 180-190.
35. Mooney, C. Z. (1992) Putting It on Paper: The Content of Written Information Used in State Lawmaking. American Politics Research, 20:3, pp. 345-365.
36. Mouritzen, P. E. and Svara, J. H. (2002) Leadership at the Apex: Politicians and Administrators in Western Local Governments, University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh
37. Moynihan, D. P. (2005) Why and How do State Governments Adopt and Implement 'Managing for Results' Reforms?. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15:2, pp. 219-243.
38. Moynihan, D. P. (2005) Goal-based Learning and the Future of Performance Management. Public Administration Review, 65:2, pp. 203-216.
39. Moynihan, D. P. and Ingraham, P. W. (2004) Integrative Leadership in the Public Sector: A Model of Performance-Information Use. Administration and Society, 36:4, pp. 427-453.
40. Niskanen, W. (1971) Bureaucracy and Representative Government, Aldrine, Chicago
41. (2006) Education at a Glance. OECD Indicators 2006, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris
42. Poister, T. H. and Streib, G. (1999) Performance Measurement in Municipal Government: Assessing the State of the Practice. Public Administration Review, 59:4, pp. 325-335.
43. Pollitt, C. (2006) Performance Management in Practice: A Comparative Study of Executive Agencies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 16:1, pp. 25-44.
44. Pollitt, C. (2006) Performance Information for Democracy-The Missing Link?. Evaluation: The International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice, 1:2, pp. 38-55.
45. Pollitt, C. (2006) "Who are We, What are We Doing, Where are We Going? A Perspective on the Performance Management Community."
46. Rich, R. F. and Oh, C. H. (2000) Rationality and Use of Information in Policy Decisions. Science Communication, 22:2, pp. 173-211.
47. Sabatier, P. and Whiteman, D. (1985) Legislative Decision Making and Substantive Policy Information: Models of Information Flow. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 10:3, pp. 395-421.
48. Simon, H. A. (1997) Administrative Behavior, The Free Press, New York
49. Talbot, C. (2005) The Oxford Handbook of Public Management, pp. 491-517. Oxford University Press, Oxford
50. United, Nations. (2002) Benchmarking E - government: A Global Perspective - Assessing the Progress of the UN Member States, United Nations, New York
51. Vakkuri, J. and Meklin, P. (2006) Ambiguity in Performance Measurement: A Theoretical Approach to Organizational Uses of Performance Measurement. Financial Accontability and Management, 22:3, pp. 235-250.
52. Verba, S., Schlozman, K. L. and Brady, H. E. (1995) Voice and Equality. Civic Voluntarism in American Politics, Harvard University Press, Cambridge
53. Waterman, R. W. and Meier, K. J. (1998) Principal-Agent Models: An Expansion?. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 8:2, pp. 173-202.
54. Whiteman, D. (1985) The Fate of Policy Analysis in Congressional Decision Making: Three Types of Use in Committees. The Western Political Quarterly, 38:2, pp. 294-311.
55. Whiteman, D. (1996) Communication in Congress: Members, Staff, and the Search for Information, University Press of Kansas, Lawrence, KS
56. Williams, D. W. (2003) Measuring Government in the Early 20th Century. Public Administration Review, 63:6, pp. 643-659.