Performance regimes amidst governance complexity

Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory

Volumn 21, Issue SUPPL. 1, 2011, Pages

  Moynihan, Donald P ^a   Fernandez, Sergio ^b   Kim, Soonhee ^c   Leroux, Kelly M ^d   Piotrowski, Suzanne J ^e   Wright, Bradley E ^f   Yang, Kaifeng ^g  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON   (United States)

^b INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO   (United States)

^e RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^f UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHARLOTTE   (United States)

^g FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 79251529192     PISSN: 10531858     EISSN: 14779803     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/jopart/muq059     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Andrews, Matt. 2010. Good government means different things in different countries. Governance 23: 7-35.
2. Moynihan et al. Performance Regimes Amidst Governance Complexity i153
3. Arndt, Christiane. 2008. The politics of governance ratings. International Public Management Journal 11:275-97.
4. Askim, Jostein, A°ge Johnsen, and Knut-Andreas Christophersen. 2008. Factors behind organizational learning from benchmarking. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 18:297-320.
5. Bourdeaux, Carolyn, and Grace Chikoto. 2008. Legislative influences on performance management reform. Public Administration Review 68:253-65.
6. Brown, Trevor, Matthew Potoski, and David Van Slyke. 2006. Managing public service contracts. Public Administration Review 66:323-31.
7. -. 2008. Contracting for complex products. Paper presented at Minnowbrook III Conference, Lake Placid, NY, September 5-7.
8. Brunnson, Nils. 1989. The organization of hypocrisy. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons.
9. Carothers, Thomas. 1999. Aiding democracy abroad. Washington, DC: Carnegie Endowment.
10. de Lancer Julnes, Patria, and Marc Holzer. 2001. Promoting the utilization of performance measures in public organizations. Public Administration Review 61:693-708.
11. deLeon, Linda, and Robert B. Denhardt. 2000. The political theory of reinvention. Public Administration Review 60:89-97.
12. Dias, Janice Johnson, and Steven Maynard-Moody. 2007. For-profit welfare: Contracts, conflicts, and the performance paradox. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 17:189-211.
13. Dilulio, John J. 1989. Recovering the public management variable: Lessons from schools, prisons, and armies. Public Administration Review 49:127-33.
14. Donahue, J. D., and J. S. Nye. 2002. Market-based governance: Supply side, demand side, upside and downside. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
15. Epstein, Paul D., Paul M. Coates, and D. Lyle. 2005. Wray with David Swain. Results that matter. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.
16. Fernandez, S. 2009. Understanding contracting performance: An empirical analysis. Administration & Society 41:67-100.
17. Frederickson, H. George. 1980. New public administration. University, AL: Univ. of Alabama Press.
18. Frederickson, David G., and H. George Frederickson. 2006. Measuring the performance of the hollow state. Washington, DC: Georgetown Univ. Press.
19. Hatry, Harry P. 1999. Performance measurement: Getting results. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
20. Heinrich, Carolyn J. 2007. False or fitting recognition? The use of high performance bonuses in motivating organizational achievements. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 26:281-304.
21. Holzer M., and Seang-Tae Kim. 2007. Digital Governance in Municipalities Worldwide. http://unpan1 .un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/aspa/ unpan031374.pdf (accessed October 4, 2010)
22. Jennings, Edward T., and Meg Patrick Haist. 2006. Putting performance measurement in context. In The art of governance, ed. Patricia W. Ingraham and Laurence E. Lynn, 173-94. Washington, DC: Georgetown Univ. Press.
23. Kaufmann, Daniel, and Aart Kraay. 2008. Governance indicators: Where are we and where should we be going? The World Bank Research Observer 23:1-30.
24. Kelman, Steven. 2007. Public administration and organization studies. In Academy of management annals, ed. Arthur Brief and James P. Walsh, 225-67. New York: Erlbaum.
25. Keohane, Robert O. 2002. Power and governance in a partially globalized world. London: Routledge.
26. Kettl, Donald F. 1993. Sharing power: Public governance and private markets. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
27. Lijphart, Arend. 1999. Patterns of democracy. New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press.
28. Mandell, Myrna P., and Robin Keast. 2008. Evaluating the effectiveness of interorganizational relations through networks. Public Management Review 10:716-31.
29. Manning, Nick. 2001. The legacy of the new public management in developing countries. International Review of Administrative Sciences 67:297-312.
30. Melkers, Julia, and Katherine Willoughby. 2005. Models of performance-measurement use in local governments. Public Administration Review 65:180-90.
31. Moynihan, Donald P. 2008. The dynamics of performance management: Constructing information and reform. Washington, DC: Georgetown Univ. Press.
32. 2009. Through a glass darkly: Understanding the effects of performance regimes. Public Performance & Management Review 32, 586-98.
33. Moynihan, Donald P., and Patricia W. Ingraham. 2004. Integrative leadership in the public sector: A model of performance information use. Administration & Society 36:427-53.
34. Moynihan, Donald P., and Sanjay K. Pandey. 2010. The big question for performance management: Why do managers use performance information? Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 20:849-66.
35. O'Toole, Laurence J. 1997. The implications for democracy in a networked bureaucratic world. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 7:443-59.
36. Piotrowski, Suzanne J., and David Rosenbloom. 2002. Nonmission-based values in results oriented public management. Public Administration Review 62:643-57.
37. Post, Stephanie S. 2004. Metropolitan area governance and institutional collective action. In Metropolitan governance: Conflict, competition, and cooperation, ed. Richard C. Feiock, 67-94. Washington, DC: Georgetown Univ. Press.
38. Provan, Keith G., and H. Brinton Milward. 2001. Do networks really work? A framework for evaluating public sector organizational networks. Public Administration Review 61:414-23.
39. Radin, Beryl. 2006. Challenging the performance movement: accountability, complexity and democratic values. Washington, DC: Georgetown Univ. Press.
40. Romzek, Barbara. 2008. The tangled wed of accountability in contracting networks. Presented at the Kettering Foundation Symposium on Accountability, May 22-23, Dayton, OH.
41. Rosenbloom, David H. 1983. Public administration theory and the separation of powers. Public Administration Review 43:219-27.
42. -. 2007. Reinventing administrative prescriptions: The case for democratic-constitutional impact statements and scorecards. Public Administration Review 67:28-39.
43. Schick, Allen. 1998. Why most developing countries should not try New Zealand's reforms. The World Bank Research Observer 13:123-31.
44. Stivers, Camilla. 2008. Governance in dark times: Practical philosophy for public service. Washington, DC: Georgetown Univ. Press.
45. Soss, Joe, Richard Fording, and Sanford Schram. Forthcoming. The organization of discipline: From performance management to perversity and punishment. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory.
46. Taussig, Michael. 1999. Defacement: Public secrecy and the labor of the negative. Stanford, CA: Stanford Univ. Press.
47. Thomson, Ann Marie., James L. Perry, and Theodore K. Miller. 2009. Conceptualizing and measuring collaboration. Journal of Public Administration Theory and Research 19:23-56.
48. Transparency International. 2007. Global Corruption Report 2007. http://www.transparency.org/ publications/publications (Retrieved November, 2007).
49. United Nations Project Office on Governance. 2008. A management capacity framework for local governments to strengthen transparency in local governance in Asia. Project report to the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs.
50. Van de Walle, Steven. 2008. Comparing the performance of national public sectors: Conceptual problems. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management 57:329-38.
51. Van Slyke, David M. 2007. Agents or stewards: Using stewardship theory to understand the governmentnonprofit social service contracting relationship. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 17:157-87.
52. Wichowsky, Amber, and Donald P. Moynihan. 2008. Measuring how administration shapes citizenship: A policy feedback perspective on performance management. Public Administration Review 68: 908-20.
53. World Bank. 2007. Governance matters 2007: Worldwide governance indicators 1996-2006.http:// info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi2007/ (accessed August 2007).
54. Yang, Kaifeng, and Marc Holzer. 2006. The performance-trust link: Implications for performance measurement. Public Administration Review 66:114-26.