On the unintended consequences of publishing performance data in the public sector

International Journal of Public Administration

Volumn 18, Issue 2-3, 1995, Pages 277-310

  Smith, Peter ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84959939551     PISSN: 01900692     EISSN: 15324265     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/01900699508525011     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Federation des Experts Comptables Europeens Performance Measurement in Public Sector Management, Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy, London, 1991.
2. Stewart, J. D. “The Role of Information in Public Accountability” in A. Hopwood and C. Tomkins (eds) Issues in Public Sector Accounting, Phillip Allan, Oxford, 1984, pp. 13–34.
3. Hofstede, G. “Management Control of Public and Not-for-profit Activities.” Accounting, Organizations and Society 6 (1981): 193–211.
4. Carter, N. and Greer, P. “Evaluating Agencies; Next Steps and Performance Indicators.” Public Administration 71 (1993): 407–416.
5. Tomkins, C. Achieving Economy, Efficiency and Effectiveness in The Public Sector, Kogan Page, London, 1987.
6. Trumpington, Baroness “OR in Government.” Journal of the Operational Research Society 38 (1987): 907-912.
7. Thain, C. and Wright, M. “Planning and Controlling Public Expenditure in The UK, Part II: The Effects and Effectiveness of The Survey,” Public Administration 70 (1992): 193–224.
8. Beer, S. Decision and Control, Wiley, Chichester, 1966.
9. Anthony, R. N. and Young, D. W. Management Control in Nonprofit Organizations, third edition, Richard D. Irwin, Homewood, 1984.
10. Forrester, J. W. Principles of Systems: Text and Workbook, MIT Press, Cambridge, 1968.
11. Emmanuel, C., Otley, D. and Merchant, K. Accounting for Management Control, Second edition, Chapman and Hall, London, 1990, p. 12.
12. Smith, P. “Outcome-related Performance Indicators and Organizational Control in The Public Sector.” British Journal of Management 4 (1993): 135–151.
13. Williamson, O. A. Markets and Hierarchies, Free Press, New York, 1975.
14. Tomkins. C. Corporate Resource Allocation, Blackwell, Oxford, 1991.
15. Emmanuel, Otley and Merchant, Op. Cit.
16. Nove, A. The Soviet Economic System, Allen and Unwin, London, 1980.
17. Carter, N., Klein, R. E. and Day, P. How Organizations Measure Success: The Use of Performance Indicators in Government, Routledge, London, 1992.
18. Baiman, S. “Agency Research in Managerial Accounting: A Second Look.” Accounting, Organizations and Society 15 (1990): 341–371.
19. Committee of Public Accounts Maternity Services, Thirty-fifth Report, Session 1989–90, HMSO, London, 1990.
20. Smith, Op. Cit.
21. Health Committee Maternity Services, Second Report, Session 1991–92, HMSO, London, 1992.
22. Audit Commission Citizen’s Charter Indicators: Charting a Course, HMSO, London, 1992.
23. Hopwood, A.G. Accounting and Human Behaviour, Prentice/Hall, Englewood Cliffs, 1974.
24. Kaplan, R. S. and Norton, D. F. “The Balanced Scorecard - Measures That Drive Performance.” Harvard Business Review 70 (1992): 71–79.
25. Ouchi, W. G. “A Conceptual Framework for The Design of Organizational Control Mechanisms.” Management Science 25 (1979): 833–848.
26. Etzioni, A. The Active Society: A Theory of Societal and Political Processes, The Free Press, New York, 1968.
27. Benefits Agency Business Plan, 1993/1994, Department of Social Security, London, 1993.
28. Sheehy, P. Inquiry Into Police Responsibilities and Rewards, Volume I: Report, HMSO, London, 1993.
29. Kerr, S. “On The Folly of Rewarding A While Hoping for B.” Academy of Management Journal (1975): 769–783.
30. Department for Education Choice and Diversity: A New Framework for Schools, HMSO, London, 1992.
31. Guardian, “The Big Rise in Queues for Hospital Treatment.” The Guardian, 13 May 1992.
32. Pollitt, C. “Bringing Consumers into Performance Measurement: Concepts, Consequences and Constraints.” Policy and Politics 16 (1988): 77–87.
33. Flynn, N. “Performance Measurement in Public Sector Services.” Policy and Politics 14 (1986): 389–404.
34. Watts, R. L. and Zimmerman, J. L. Positive Accounting Theory, Prentice/Hall, Englewood Cliffs, 1986.
35. Jones, C. S. “Universities, on Becoming What They Are Not.” Financial Accountability and Management 2 (1986): 107–119.
36. Smith, P. “The Use of Performance Indicators in The Public Sector.” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A 153 (1990): 53–72.
37. Smith, P. “Negative Political Feedback: An Examination of The Problem of Modelling Political Responses in Public Sector Effectiveness Auditing.” Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 5 (1992): 5–20.
38. United Kingdom Government The Citizen’s Charter, HMSO, London, 1991.
39. Department of Education and Science “Tests of 7 Year Olds Reveal Unacceptable Variations,” DES Press Release 436/91, The Department, London, 1991.
40. Kornai, J. The Socialist System: The Political Economy of Communism, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1992.
41. Birman, I. “From the Achieved Level,” Soviet Studies 30 (1978): 153–172.
42. Jaworski, B. J. and Young, S. M. “Dysfunctional Behavior and Management Control: An Empirical Study of Marketing Managers.” Accounting, Organizations and Society 17 (1992): 17–35.
43. Weitzman, M. “The New Soviet Incentive System.” Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science 7 (1976): 251–257.
44. Ganley, J. A. and Cubbin, S. J. Public Sector Efficiency Measurement: Applications of Data Envelopment Analysis, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1992.
45. Smith, P. “Assessing Competition Among Local Authorities in England and Wales.” Financial Accountability and Management 4 (1988): 235–251.
46. Hofstede, Op, Cit.
47. Smith, “The Use of Performance Indicators in The Public Sector,” Op. Cit.