Results-based governance: Collaborating for outcomes

Collaboration in Public Services: The Challenge for Evaluation

Volumn , Issue , 2017, Pages 155-178

  Mayne, John ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 79951623736     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: None     Document Type: Chapter

References (57)

1. Armstrong, J., and D. Lenihan. 1999. From Controlling to Collaborating: When Governments Want to be Partners: A Report on the Collaborative Partnerships Project. New Directions Number 3, Institute of Public Administration, Toronto
2. Audit Commission. 1996. Local Authorities Performance Indicators 1994/95. London: HMSO
3. Auditor General of Canada. 1996. Report to the House of Commons: Matters of Special Importance-1996. Ottawa
4. Auditor General of Canada. 1998. 'Auditor General's Assessment' in The Canadian Food Inspection Agency. Annual Report. Ottawa
5. Auditor General of Canada. 1999a. Report to the House of Commons: Chapter 5: Collaborative Arrangements: Issues for the Federal Government. Ottawa
6. Auditor General of Canada. 1999b. Report to the House of Commons: Chapter 23: Involving Others in Governing: Accountability at Risk. Ottawa
7. Auditor General of Canada. 2000a. Report to the House of Commons: Chapter 19: Reporting Performance to Parliment: Progress Too Slow. Ottawa
8. Auditor General of Canada. 2000b. Report to the House of Commons: Chapter 20: Managing Departments for Results and Managing Horizontal Issues for Results. Ottawa
9. Auditor General of Western Australia. 1997. Public Sector Performance Report 1997. Perth
10. Behn, R. D. 1995. The Big Questions of Public Management. Public Administration Review, 55/4 July/August: 313-324
11. Boyle, R. 1999. The Management of Cross-Cutting Issues. Committee for Public Management Research and Institute of Public Administration. Dublin
12. Canada. 1999. A Framework to Improve the Social Union for Canadians. An agreement between the Government of Canada and the Governments of the Provinces and Territories. February 4. http://socialunion.gc.ca
13. Chigbo, O. 1998. 'GAAP under fire' Camagazine, January/February
14. Cm 4181. 1998. Public Services for the Future: Modernisation, Reform, Accountability. Chief Secretary to the Treasury. London: The Stationery Office
15. Governor General. 1997. Speech from the Throne to Open the First Session Thirty-Sixth Parliament of Canada. Privy Council Office. Ottawa. http://www.pco-bcp.gc.ca
16. Gunvaldsen, J., and R. Karlsen. 1999. 'The Auditor as an Evaluator-How to Remain an Influential Force in the Political Landscape' Evaluation 5 (4): 458-467
17. Hatry, H. 1997. 'We Need a New Concept of Accountability' The Public Manager, 263: 37-38
18. Howse, R. 1997. 'Outcome-based National Standards as an Instrument of Federalism: The Case of the Labour Market Agreements' The Alternatives Network, 23
19. Hudson, J., J. Mayne, and R. Thomlison. 1992. Action-Oriented Evaluation in Organizations: Canadian Practices. Toronto: Wall and Emerson
20. John, D., D. Kettl, B. Dyer and B. Lovan. 1994. 'What Will New Governance Mean for the Federal Government?' Public Administration Review, 542: 170-175
21. Kettl, D. F. 1997. 'The Global Revolution in Public Management: Driving Themes, Missing Links' Policy Analysis and Management, 163: 446-462
22. Kirkpatrick, I. 1999. 'The Worst of Both Worlds? Public Services Without Markets or Bureaucracy' Public Money and Management. October/December, 19/4: 7-14
23. Majone, G. 1989. Evidence, Arguments and Persuasion in the Policy Process. London: Yale University Press
24. Mayne, J. 1997. 'Accountability for Program Performance: A Key to Effective Performance Monitoring and Reporting' in J. Mayne and E. Zapico-Goni (eds.), Monitoring Performance in the Public Sector: Future Directions from International Experience. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers
25. Mayne, J., and E. Zapico-Goni (eds.). 1997. Performance Monitoring: Implications for the Future. Monitoring Performance in the Public Sector: Future Directions from International Experience. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers
26. Mayne, J. 1999. Addressing Attribution with Performance Measurement: Using Performance Measures Sensibly. Office of the Auditor General of Canada. http://www.oagbug. gc.ca/domino/other.nsf/html/99dpl_e.html
27. Metcalfe, L. 1993. 'Public Management: From Imitation to Innovation' in J. Kooiman (ed.), Modern Governance. London: Sage, 173-189
28. Michael, D. 1993. 'Governing by Learning: Boundaries, Myths and Metaphors. Futures, January/February: 81-89
29. National Performance Review. 1999. Balancing Measures: Best Practices in Performance Management. Washington, DC
30. Natural Resources Canada 1999. Final Evaluation Framework for Canada's Model Forest Program. Audit and Review branch. Ottawa
31. OECD. 1997. In Search of Results: Performance Management Practices. Paris
32. OECD. 1998. Managing Across Levels of Government: Part One, Overview. Paris. http:// www.oecd.org/pdf/M00004000/M00004170.pdf
33. OECD. 2000. The OECD Outputs Manual. 21st Annual Meeting of Senior Budget Officials. Paris, May 29-30
34. Office of the Auditor General and Treasury Board Secretariat. 1998. Modernizing Accountability Practices. Ottawa. http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/rma/account/OAGTBS_E.html
35. O'Hara, K. 1997. Securing the Social Union. Canadian Policy Research Network
36. Paquet, G. 1999. Governance Through Social Learning. Ottawa: University of Ottawa
37. Power, M. 1997. The Audit Society: Rituals of Verification. Oxford: Oxford University Press
38. Prime Minister and Minister for the Cabinet Office. 1999. Modernising Government. London: Stationery Office
39. Privy Council Office 1997. Fourth Annual Report to the Prime Minister on The Public Service of Canada. Ottawa
40. Rae, B. 1998. The Three Questions: Prosperity and the Public Good. Toronto: Penguin Books
41. Rhodes, R. A. W. 1996. 'The New Governance: Governing without Government' Political Studies XLIV, 652-667
42. Saul, J. S. 1997. Reflections of a Siamese Twin: Canada at the End of the Twentieth Century. Toronto: Viking Penguin
43. Shergold, P. 1997. 'The Colour Purple: Perceptions of Accountability across the Tasman' Public Administration and Development, 172: 293-306
44. Smith, P. 1995. 'On the Unintended Consequences of Publishing Performance Data in the Public Sector' International Journal of Public Administration, 18 (2 & 3): 277-310
45. Steering Committee for the Review of Commonwealth/State Service Provision. 1997. 1997 Report on Government Services. Australia
46. Steering Committee for the Review of Commonwealth/State Service Provision. 1998. 1998 Report on Government Services. Australia
47. Stowe, K. 1992. 'Good Piano Won't Play Bad Music: Administrative Reform and Good Governance' Public Administration, 70: 387-394
48. Strange, S. 1996. The Retreat of the State. New York: Cambridge University Press
49. Tapscott, D. 1998. 'The Brave New World of E-Domocracy: Debate Must Mow Begin on the Parameters of Digital Liberty. Financial Post, December 16
50. Tasmanian Audit Office. 1996. Review of Performance Indicators of Government Departments. Special Report No. 24
51. Toulemonde, J., C. Fontaine, E. Laudren, and P. Vincke. 1998. 'Evaluation in Partnership' Evaluation, 42: 171-188
52. Walsh, K. 1995. Public Services and Market Mechanisms: Competition, Contracting and the New Public Management. Basingstoke: Macmillan
53. Wholey, J. S., and K. Newcomer. 1997. 'Clarifying Goals, Reporting Results' New Directions for Evaluation, No. 75, Fall: 91-98
54. Wholey, J. S. 1999. 'Performance-Based Management: Responding to the Challenges' Public Productivity and Management Review, 223; 288-307
55. World Bank. 1994. Governance: The World Bank's Experience. Washington, DC
56. World Bank. 1998a. Partnerships for Development: Proposed Actions for the World Bank. Discussion Paper, Partnerships Group, Strategic and Resource Management. Washington, DC
57. World Bank. 1998b. 1998 Annual Report on Operations Evaluation. Operations Evaluation Department. Washington, DC