Management by Results: Its Origin and Development in the Case of the Swedish State

International Public Management Journal

Volumn 9, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 399-427

  sundström, Göran ^a  

^a STOCKHOLM UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85009628561     PISSN: 10967494     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10967490601077178     Document Type: Article

References (71)

1. Amna, E. 1981. Planhushdllning i den offentliga sektom? Budgetdialogen mellan regering och forvaltning under efterkrigstiden. Norstedts.
2. Andersson, C. 2004. Tudelad trots alltdualismens överlevnad I den svenska staten 1718-1987. Stockholm University: Department of Political Science.
3. Andren, N. 1976. “Program Budgeting: The Swedish Experiment.” in A. F. Leeman, ed., The Management of Change. Haag: Institute of Social Studies, Martinus Nijhofif.
4. Argote, L. 1999. Organizational Learning: Creating, Retaining, and Transferring Knowledge. Kluwer Academic.
5. Argyris, C. 1990. Overcoming Organizational Defence. New York: Allyn & Bacon.
6. Barzelay, M. 2001. The New Public Management. Improving Research and Political Dialogue. Berkeley: University of California Press.
7. Barzelay, M. 2003. “Introduction to the Process Dynamics of Public Management Policymaking.” International Public Management Journal 6(3): 251-282.
8. Bennett, A. and A. L. George, 1997. Process Tracing in Case Study Research. Paper presented at MacArthur Foundation Workshop on Case Study Methods, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs (BC SI A), Harvard University, 17-19 October 1997. (www.georgetown.edu/bennett/PROTCG.htm)
9. de Bruijn, H. 2002. Managing Performance in the Public Sector. New York: Routledge.
10. Brunsson, K. 1988. Ny budgethandbok? RRV, memo, diary no 1988: 462.
11. Brunsson, N. and S. Jonsson, 1979. Beslut och handling. Om politikers inflytande pa politiken. Stockholm: Liber Forlag.
12. Christensen, T. and P. Laigreid, 2006. Autonomy and Regulation. Coping with Agencies in the Modem State. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd.
13. Downs, A. 1967. Inside Bureaucracy. Boston: Little, Brown.
14. Dunleavy, P. 1991. Democracy, Bureaucracy and Public Choice. Economic Explanations in Political Science. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
15. Ehn, P. and G. Sundstrom, 1997. “Samspelet mellan regeringen och statsforvaltningen,” in Det svara samspelet, SOU 1997:15.
16. Feldman, M. S. and B. T. Pentland, 2003. “Reconceptualizing Organizational Routines as a Source of Flexibility and Change.” Administrative Science Quarterly 48: 94-118.
17. Flippen, A. R. 1999. “Understanding Groupthink from a Self-regulatory Perspective.” Small Group Research 30(2): 139-165.
18. Furubo, J-E. 2003. Why evaluations sometimes can’t be used - and why they shouldn't. Paper presented at the International Evaluation Research Group, Rom, May 2003.
19. George, A. and T. McKeown, 1985. “Case Studies and Theories of Organizational Decision Making.” in Advances in Information Processing in Organizations, Vol. 2. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
20. Goodnow, F. 1900. Politics and Administration. A Study in Government. New York: Russell and Russell.
21. Gorpe, P. 1978. Politikerna, byrakraterna och de nya styrformerna. Stockholm: Liber Forlag.
22. Hall, P. A. and R. C. R. Taylor, 1996. Political Science and the Three New Institutionalisms.” Political Studies 64: 936-957.
23. Hall, P. A. 1993. Policy Paradigms, Social Learning, and the State: The Case of Economic Pol­icymaking in Britain.” Comparative Politics 25(3): 275-296.
24. Hall, P. A. 2003. “Aligning Ontology and Methodology in Comparative Politics.” in J. Mahoney and D. Rueschemeyer, eds., Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Science Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
25. t’Hart, P. 1990. Groupthink in Government: A Study of Small Groups and Policy Failure. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
26. Hill, M. 1997. The Policy Process in the Modern State. Third edition. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
27. Jacobsen, D. I. 1997. Administrasjonens makt-om forholdet mellom politikk og administrasjon. Fagforlaget.
28. Jacobsson, B. 1989. Konsten att reagera Intressen, institutioner och ndringspolitik. Stockholm: Carlssons.
29. Janis, I. L. 1972. The Victims of Groupthink. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
30. Levinthal, D. A. and J. G. March. 1993. “The Myopia of Learning.” Strategic Management Journal 14: 95-112.
31. Levitt, B. and J. G. March. 1988. “Organizational Learning.” Annual Review of Sociology 14: 319-340.
32. Mahoney, J. 2000. “Path Dependence in Historical Sociology.” Theory and Society 29: 507-548.
33. March, J. G. 1991. “Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning.” Organization Studies 2: 71-87.
34. March, J. G. and J. P. Olsen, 1989. Rediscovering Institutions. The Organizational Basis of Politics. New York: The Free Press.
35. Mohr, L. B. 1982. Explaining Organizational Behavior: The Limits and Possibilities of Theory and Research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
36. Mosher, F. C. 1982. Democracy and the Public Service. New York: Oxford University Press.
37. Niskanen, W. A., 1971. Bureaucracy and Representative Government. New York: Aldine- Atherton.
38. North, D. 1993. Economic performance through time. Paper presented for the Nobel Prize Committee, 9 December 1993.
39. Nybom, T. 1980. “Det nya Statskontorets framvaxt 1960 1965.” Pp. 1680-1980 in A. Granholm and M. Ryden, eds., Statskontorets En jubileums- och drsskrift. Stockholm: Liber.
40. Peters, B. G. 1999. Institutional Theory in Political Science. The “New Institutionalism.” London: Continuum International Publishing Group.
41. Pierson, P. 1996. “The Path to European Integration. A Historical Institutionalist Analysis.” Comparative Political Studies 29(2): 123-163.
42. Pierson, P. 1998. Not Just What, But When: Issues of Timing and Sequence in Comparative Politics. Paper presented at the American Political Science Meetings. Boston, September 1998. (Also published in 2000 in Studies in American Political Development 14(1): 72-119.)
43. Pierson, P. 2000. “Increasing Returns, Path Dependence, and the Study of Politics.” American Political Science Review 94(2): 251-267.
44. Pollitt, C. and G. Bouckaert, 2004. Public Management Reform. A Comparative Analysis. New York: Oxford University Press.
45. Pollitt, C., C. Talbot, J. Caulfield, and A. Smullen. 2004. Agencies. How Governments Do Things Trough Semi-Autonomous Organizationi. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
46. Powell, W. W. and P. J. DiMaggio, eds. 1991. The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
47. Premfors, R. 1999. “Organisationsforandringar och forvaltningspolitik: Sverige.” in P. Liegreid and O. K. Pedersen, eds., Fra ophygning til ombygning i staten. Organisationsfor- andringer i tre nordiske lande. Copenhagen: Jurist- og 0konomforbundets Forlag.
48. Premfors, R. 2002. “Historical-Institutional and Comparative Analysis.” Chapter in the forthcoming book Democracy in Sweden: A Historical and Comparative Perspective. Presented at SCORE 2002-08-19.
49. RRV. 1970. Forvaltningsrevision i staten: Mdl och medel for granskaning av effektiviteten i statsfdrvaltningen. RRV.
50. RRV. 1975a. “ SEA-Statens ekonomiadministrativa system.” in Effektiv statsforvaltning. Edited by Statskontoret, RRV, Statens personalnamnd och Statens personalutbildnings- namnd.
51. RRV. 1975b.Utvardering av forsdksverksamhet medprogramhudgetering. En sammanfattande slutrapport.
52. RRV. 1975c. Utvardering av forsdksverksamhet med programhudgetering. Delrapport 4, dnr 1972:520.
53. RRV. 1976. On: metoder for att heddma statliga myndigheter.
54. RRV. 1979. “Utvardering av budgethandbokens effekter.” RRV dnr 1979:868.
55. Sinatra, M. 1996. Counterfactual Analysis and Path-Dependent Thinking in the Study of International and Comparative Politics. Paper presented at American Political Science Associ­ation Annual Meetings, San Francisco.
56. Statskontoret. 1974. Statsfdrvaltningen planerar. Aktdrer, rollfdrdelning, samverksansformer.
57. Statskontoret. 2005. Statsforvaltningens utveckling 1990-2005. Statskontoret 2005:32.
58. Street, M. D. 1997. “Groupthink.” Small Group Research 28: 72-94.
59. Sundstrdm, G. 2003. Stat pa villovdgar. Resultatstyrningens framvdxt i ett historisk-institutio- nellt perspektiv. Stockholm University: Department of Political Science.
60. Taras, D. G. 1991. “Breaking the Silence: Differentiating Crises of Agreement.” in Public Administration Quarterly 14: 401-418.
61. Tarschys, D. 1978. Den offentliga revolutionen. Stockholm: Liber Forlag.
62. Tetlock, P. E. and A. Belkin, eds., 1996. Counterfactual Thought Experiments in World Politics: Logical, Methodological, and Psychological Perspectives. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
63. Thelen, K. and S. Steinmo, 1992. “Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Politics.” in S. Steinmo, K. Thelen, and F. Longstreth, eds., Structuring Politics: Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Analysis. Cambridge Studies in Comparative Politics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
64. Thelen, K. 1998. Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Politics. Paper presented at the American Political Science Association Meetings, Boston.
65. Thelen, K. 2003. “How Institutions Evolve: Insights from Comparative Historical Analysis.” in J. Mahoney and D. Rueschemeyer, eds., Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Science. New York: Cambridge University Press.
66. Tilly, C. 1995. “To Explain Political Processes.” American Journal of Sociology 100(6): 1594-1610.
67. Weir, M. and T. Skocpol, 1985. “State Structures and the Possibilities for ‘Keynesian’ Responses to the Great Depression in Sweden, Britain and the United States.” in P. Evans et al., eds., Bringing the State Back In. New York: Cambridge University Press.
68. Weir, M. 1992. “Ideas and the Politics of Bounded Innovation,” in S. Steinmo, K. Thelen, and F. Longstreth, ed., Structuring Politics: Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Analysis. Cambridge Studies in Comparative Politics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
69. Weir, M. 2006. “When Does Politics Create Policy? The Organizational Politics of Change.” in I. Shapiro, S. Skowronek, and D. Galvin, eds., The Art of the State: Rethinking Political Institutions. New York: New York University Press.
70. Wilson, J. Q. 1989. Bureaucracy: What Government Agencies Do and Why They Do It. New York: Basic Books.
71. Wilson, W. 1887. “The Study of Administration.” Political Science Quarterly 2(2): 197-222.