Extending the theory of goal ambiguity to programs: Examining the relationship between goal ambiguity and performance

Public Administration Review

Volumn 74, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 205-219

  Jung, Chan Su ^a  

^a CITY UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG   (Hong Kong)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84896391523     PISSN: 00333352     EISSN: 15406210     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/puar.12176     Document Type: Article

References (94)

1. Allison, Graham T. 1983. Public and Private Management: Are They Fundamentally Alike in All Unimportant Respects? In Public Management: Public and Private Perspectives, edited by James L. Perry and Kenneth L. Kraemer, 72-92. Palo Alto, CA: Mayfield.
2. Andrews, Rhys, George A. Boyne, and Richard M. Walker. 2006. Strategy Content and Organizational Performance: An Empirical Analysis. Public Administration Review 66(1): 52-63.
3. Bandura, Albert. 1989. Self-Regulation of Motivation and Action through Internal Standards and Goal Systems. In Goal Concepts in Personality and Social Psychology, edited by Lawrence A. Perv19-85. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
4. Behn, Robert D. 2001. Rethinking Democratic Accountability. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
5. Bertelli, Anthony M., and Peter John. 2010. Government Checking Government: How Performance Measures Expand Distributive Politics. Journal of Politics 72(2): 545-58.
6. Blumenthal, W. Michael. 1983. Candid Reflections of a Businessman in Washington. In Public Management: Public and Private Perspectives, edited by James L. Perry and Kenneth L. Kraemer, 22-33. Palo Alto, CA: Mayfield.
7. Boyne, George A. 2002. Concepts and Indicators of Local Authority Performance: An Evaluation of the Statutory Frameworks in England and Wales. Public Money and Management 22(2): 17-24.
8. Boyne, George A., and Alex A. Chen. 2007. Performance Targets and Public Service Improvement. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 17(3): 455-77.
9. Chun, Young Han, and Hal G. Rainey. 2005a. Goal Ambiguity and Organizational Performance in U.S. Federal Agencies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 15(4): 529-57.
10. Chun, Young Han, and Hal G. Rainey. 2005b. Goal Ambiguity in U.S. Federal Agencies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 15(1): 1-30.
11. Chun, Young Han, and Hal G. Rainey. 2006. Consequences of Goal Ambiguity in Public Organizations. In Public Service Performance: Perspectives on Measurement and Management, edited by George A. Boyne, Kenneth J. Meier, Laurence J. O'Toole, Jr., and Richard M. Walker, 92-112. New York: Cambridge University Press.
12. Clinton, Joshua D., and David E. Lewis. 2008. Expert Opinion, Agency Characteristics, and Agency Preferences. Political Analysis 16(1): 3-20.
13. Connell, James P., and Adena M. Klem. 2000. You Can Get There from Here: Using a Theory of Change Approach to Plan Urban Education Reform. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation 11(1): 93-120.
14. Dahl, Robert A., and Charles E. Lindblom. 1953. Politics, Economics, and Welfare: Planning and Politico-Economic Systems Resolved into Basic Social Processes. New York: Harper.
15. Downs, Anthony. 1967. Inside Bureaucracy. Boston: Little, Brown.
16. Dull, Matthew. 2006. Why PART? The Institutional Politics of Presidential Budget Reform. Journal of Public Administration and Research Theory 16(2): 187-215.
17. Frederickson, David G., and H. George Frederickson. 2006. Measuring the Performance of the Hollow State. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
18. Gallo, Nick, and David E. Lewis. 2012. The Consequences of Presidential Patronage for Federal Agency Performance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 22(2): 219-43.
19. Gilmour, John B. 2006. Implementing OMB's Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART): Meeting the Challenges of Integrating Budget and Performance. Washington, DC: IBM Center for the Business of Government.
20. Gilmour, John B., and David E. Lewis. 2006a. Assessing Performance Budgeting at OMB: The Influence of Politics, Performance, and Program Size. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 16(2): 169-86.
21. Gilmour, John B., and David E. Lewis. 2006b. Does Performance Budgeting Work? An Examination of the Office of Management and Budget's Part Scores. Public Administration Review 66(5): 742-52.
22. Gilmour, John B., and David E. Lewis. 2006c. Political Appointees and the Competence of Federal Program Management. American Politics Research 34(1): 22-50.GoggMalcolm L. 1986. The "Too Few Cases/Too Many Variables" Problem in Implementation Research. Political Research Quarterly 39(2): 328-47.
23. GoggMalcolm L., Ann O'M. Bowman, James P. Lester, and Laurence J. O'Toole, Jr. 1990. Implementation Theory and Practice: Toward a Third Generation. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman/Little, Brown.
24. Hassan, Shahidul, and John Rohrbaugh. 2011. The Role of Psychological Climate on Public Sector Employees' Organizational Commitment: An Empirical Assessment for Three Occupational Groups. International Public Management Journal 14(1): 27-62.
25. Haynes, Stephen N., David C. S. Richard, and Edward S. Kubany. 1995. Content Validity in Psychological Assessment: A Functional Approach to Concepts and Methods. Psychological Assessment 7(3): 238-47.
26. Heinrich, Carolyn J. 1999. Do Government Bureaucrats Make Effective Use of Performance Management Information? Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 9(3): 363-93.
27. Heinrich, Carolyn J. 2003. Measuring Public Sector Performance and Effectiveness. In Handbook of Public Administration, edited by B. Guy Peters and Jon Pierre, 25-37. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
28. 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(2): 281-304.
29. Heinrich, Carolyn J. 2012. How Credible Is the Evidence, and Does It Matter? An Analysis of the Program Assessment Rating Tool. Public Administration Review 72(1): 123-34.
30. Hyndman, Noel, and Ron Eden. 2000. A Study of the Coordination of Mission, Objectives and Targets in U.K. Executive Agencies. Management Accounting Research 11(2): 175-91.
31. Hyndman, Noel, and Ron Eden. 2001. Rational Management, Performance Targets and Executive Agencies: Views from Agency Chief Executives in Northern Ireland. Public Administration 79(3): 579-98.
32. Jung, Chan Su. 2011. Organizational Goal Ambiguity and Performance: Conceptualization, Measurement, and Relationships. International Public Management Journal 14(2): 193-217.
33. Jung, Chan Su. 2012a. Developing and Validating New Concepts and Measures of Program Goal Ambiguity in the U.S. Federal Government. Administration & Society 44(6): 675-701.
34. Jung, Chan Su. 2012b. Why Are Goals Important in the Public Sector? Exploring the Benefits of Goal Clarity for Reducing Turnover Intention. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 24(1): 209-34.
35. Jung, Chan Su. 2013a. Navigating a Rough Terrain of Public Management: Examining the Relationship between Organizational Size and Effectiveness. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 23(3): 663-86.
36. Jung, Chan Su. 2013b. Organizational Goal Ambiguity and Job Satisfaction in the Public Sector. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory. Published electronically on April 1. doi:10.1093/jopart/mut020.
37. Jung, Chan Su, and Hal G. Rainey. 2011. Organizational Goal Characteristics and Public Duty Motivation in U.S. Federal Agencies. Review of Public Personnel Administration 31(1): 28-47.
38. Khademian, Anne M. 1995. Reinventing a Government Corporation: Professional Priorities and a Clear Bottom Line. Public Administration Review 55(1): 17-28.
39. Kieschnick, Robert, and Bruce D. McCullough. 2003. Regression Analysis of Variates Observed on (0, 1): Percentages, Proportions and Fractions. Statistical Modelling 3(3): 193-213.
40. Lan, Zhiyong, and Hal G. Rainey. 1992. Goals, Rules, and Effectiveness in Public, Private, and Hybrid Organizations: More Evidence on Frequent Assertions about Differences. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 2(1): 5-28.
41. Latham, Gary P. 2004. The Motivational Benefits of Goal-Setting. Academy of Management Executive 18(4): 126-29.
42. Latham, Gary P., Laura Borgogni, and Laura Petitta. 2008. Goal Setting and Performance Management in the Public Sector. International Public Management Journal 11(4): 385-403.
43. Latham, Gary P., and Edwin A. Locke. 1991. Self-Regulation through Goal Setting. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 50(2): 212-47.
44. Lee, Jung Wook, Hal G. Rainey, and Young Han Chun. 2009. Of Politics and Purpose: Political Salience and Goal Ambiguity of US Federal Agencies. Public Administration 87(3): 457-84.
45. Lee, Jung Wook, Hal G. Rainey, and Young Han Chun. 2010. Goal Ambiguity, Work Complexity, and Work Routineness in Federal Agencies. American Review of Public Administration 40(3): 284-308.
46. Lee, Thomas W., Edwin A. Locke, and Gary P. Latham. 1989. Goal Setting Theory and Job Performance. In Goal Concepts in Personality and Social Psychology, edited by Lawrence A. Perv291-326. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
47. Lewis, David E. 2008. The Politics of Presidential Appointments: Political Control and Bureaucratic Performance. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
48. Lindblom, Charles E. 1959. The Science of "Muddling Through." Public Administration Review 19(2): 79-88.
49. Locke, Edwin A., and Gary P. Latham. 1990. A Theory of Goal Setting and Task Performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
50. Locke, Edwin A., and Gary P. Latham. 2002. Building a Practically Useful Theory of Goal Setting and Task Motivation: A 35-Year Odyssey. American Psychologist 57(9):705-717.
51. Locke, Edwin A., and Gary P. Latham. 2009. Has Goal Setting Gone Wild, or Have Its Attackers Abandoned Good Scholarship? Academy of Management Perspectives 23(1): 17-23.
52. Lowi, Theodore J. 1979. The End of Liberalism: The Second Republic of the United States. New York: W. W. Norton.
53. Lynn, Laurence E., Jr. 1981. Managing the Public's Business: The Job of the Government Executive. New York: Basic Books.
54. Lynn, Laurence E., Jr. 1999. Requiring Bureaucracies to Perform: What Have We Leamed from the U.S. Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA)? Politiques et management public 17(2): 1-20.
55. Matland, Richard E. 1995. Synthesizing the Implementation Literature: The Ambiguity-Conflict Model of Policy Implementation. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 5(2): 145-74.
56. Maynard-Moody, Steven, and Charles McClintock. 1987. Weeding an Old Garden. Administration & Society 19(1): 125-42.
57. Meier, Kenneth J., and John Bohte. 2000. Ode to Luther Gulick. Administration & Society 32(2): 115-37.
58. Meier, Kenneth J., and Laurence J. O'Toole, Jr. 2007. Modeling Public Management. Public Management Review 9(4): 503-27.
59. Mercatus Center. 2007. 9th Annual Performance Report Scorecard: Which Federal Agencies Best Inform the Public? Arlington, VA: George Mason University.
60. Merton, Robert K. 1940. Bureaucratic Structure and Personality. Social Forces 18(4): 560-68.
61. Mischel, Walter. 2009. Becoming a Cumulative Science. Association for Psychological Science Observer 22(1): 18.
62. Moynihan, Donald P. 2006. What Do We Talk about When We Talk about Performance? Dialogue Theory and Performance Budgeting. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 16(2): 151-68.
63. Moynihan, Donald P. 2008. The Dynamics of Performance Management: Constructing Information and Reform. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
64. Noordegraaf, Mirko, and Tineke Abma. 2003. Management by Measurement? Public Management Practices amidst Ambiguity. Public Administration 81(4): 853-71.
65. Oldham, Greg R., and Daniel J. Brass. 1979. Employee Reactions to an Open-Plan Office: A Naturally Occurring Quasi-Experiment. Administrative Science Quarterly 24(2): 267-84.
66. Ordóñez, Lisa D., Maurice E. Schweitzer, Adam D. Galinsky, and Max H. Bazerman. 2009. Goals Gone Wild: The Systematic Side Effects of Overprescribing Goal Setting. Academy of Management Perspectives 23(1): 6-16.
67. O'Toole, Laurence J., Jr. 1986. Policy Recommendations for Multi-Actor Implementation: An Assessment of the Field. Journal of Public Policy 6(2): 181-210.
68. Pandey, Sanjay K., and Hal G. Rainey. 2006. Public Managers' Perceptions of Organizational Goal Ambiguity: Analyzing Alternative Models. International Public Management Journal 9(2): 85-112.
69. Pandey, Sanjay K., and Bradley E. Wright. 2006. Connecting the Dots in Public Management: Political Environment, Organizational Goal Ambiguity, and the Public Manager's Role Ambiguity. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 16(4): 511-32.
70. Papke, Leslie E., and Jeffrey M. Wooldridge. 1993. Econometric Methods for Fractional Response Variables with an Application to 401(k) Plan Participation Rates. Journal of Applied Econometrics 11(6): 619-32.
71. RadBeryl A. 2006. Challenging the Performance Movement: Accountability, Complexity, and Democratic Values. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
72. RadBeryl A. 2008. The Legacy of Federal Management Change: Part Repeats Familiar Problems. In Performance Management and Budgeting: How Governments Can Learn from Experience, edited by F. Stevens Redburn, Robert J. Shea, and Terry F. Buss, 114-32. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
73. Rainey, Hal G. 1983. Public Agencies and Private Firms: Incentive Structures, Goals, and Individual Roles. Administration & Society 15(2): 207-242.
74. Rainey, Hal G. 1993. Toward a Theory of Goal Ambiguity in Public Organizations. In Research in Public Administration, vol. 2, edited by James L. Perry, 121-66. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
75. Rainey, Hal G. 2009. Understanding and Managing Public Organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
76. Rainey, Hal G. 2010. Goal Ambiguity and the Study of American Bureaucracy. In The Oxford Handbook of American Bureaucracy, edited by Robert F. Durant, 231-51. New York: Oxford University Press.
77. Rainey, Hal G., and Barry Bozeman. 2000. Comparing Public and Private Organizations: Empirical Research and the Power of the A Priori. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 10(2): 447-69.
78. Ripley, Randall B., and Grace A. Franklin. 1982. Bureaucracy and Policy Implementation. Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press.
79. Salamon, Lester M. 2002. The New Governance and the Tools of Public Action: An Introduction. In The Tools of Government: A Guide to the New Governance, edited by Lester M. Salamon, 1-47. New York: Oxford University Press.
80. Shalley, Christina E. 1995. Effects of Coaction, Expected Evaluation, and Goal Setting on Creativity and Productivity. Academy of Management Journal 38(2): 483-503.
81. Smith, Craig R., and Sergio Fernandez. 2010. Equity in Federal Contracting: Examining the Link between Minority Representation and Federal Procurement Decisions. Public Administration Review 70(1): 87-96.
82. Smith, Ken G., Edwin A. Locke, and David Barry. 1990. Goal Setting, Planning, and Organizational Performance: An Experimental Simulation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 46(1): 118-34.
83. Stazyk, Edmund C., and Holly T. Goerdel. 2011. The Benefits of Bureaucracy: Public Managers' Perceptions of Political Support, Goal Ambiguity, and Organizational Effectiveness. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 21(4): 645-72.
84. U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB). 2004. FY 2004 Budget Chapter Introducing the PART: Rating the Performance of Federal Programs. http://web.archive.org/web/20080616222524/http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy04/pdf/budget/performance.pdf [accessed January 15, 2014].
85. U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB). 2006. Guidance for Completing 2006 PARTs. Program Assessment Rating Tool Guidance no. 2007-02. http://web.archive.org/web/20080616164625/http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/part/fy2006/2006_guidance_final.pdf [accessed January 15, 2014].
86. U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB). 2007. Guidance for Completing 2007 PARTs. Program Assessment Rating Tool Guidance no. 2007-12. http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/part/fy2007/2007_guidance_final.pdf [accessed January 15, 2014].
87. Van de Ven, Andrew H., and Diane L. Ferry. 1980. Measuring and Assessing Organizations. New York: Wiley.
88. Walker, Richard M., and George A. Boyne. 2006. Public Management Reform and Organizational Performance: An Empirical Assessment of the U.K. Labour Government's Public Service Improvement Strategy. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 25(2): 371-93.
89. White, Joseph. 2012. Playing the Wrong PART: The Program Assessment Rating Tool and the Functions of the President's Budget. Public Administration Review 72(1): 112-21.
90. Wildavsky, Aaron. 1979. Speaking Truth to Power: The Art and Craft of Policy Analysis. Boston: Little, Brown.
91. Wilson, James Q. 1989. Bureaucracy: What Government Agencies Do and Why They Do It. New York: Basic Books.
92. Wright, Bradley E. 2004. The Role of Work Context in Work Motivation: A Public Sector Application of Goal and Social Cognitive Theories. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 14(1): 59-78.
93. Wright, Bradley E., and Brian S. Davis. 2003. Job Satisfaction in the Public Sector: The Role of the Work Environment. American Review of Public Administration 33(1): 70-90.
94. Wright, Patrick M., Jennifer M. George, S. Regena Farnsworth, and Gary C. McMahan. 1993. Productivity and Extra-Role Behavior: The Effects of Goals and Incentives on Spontaneous Helping. Journal of Applied Psychology 78(3): 374-81.