Local Government Productivity: Efficiency and Equity

  • Jeffrey L. Brudney
  • David R. Morgan
Chapter
Part of the Policy Studies Organization Series book series (PSOS)

Abstract

As a result of increasing pressures to improve productivity, public organizations may become preoccupied with efficiency at the expense of quality and equity. This chapter reviews previous research on the quality dimension of productivity and develops methods to incorporate equity into performance measurement. Two types of approaches to equity are elaborated: the first relies on evaluation of the severity of pre-service problems of clients, and the second is based on the distribution of services across client groupings. The argument is put forward that equity considerations must become an integral part of productivity analysis.

Keywords

Productivity Measure Productivity Index Public Organization Social Equity Urban Institute 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Adam, E. E., Jr (1979), ‘Quality and productivity in delivering and administering public service’, Public Productivity Review, 3, pp. 26–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ammons, D. and J. King (1983), ‘Productivity improvement in local government: Its place among competing priorities’, Public Administration Review, 43, 113–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Blau, P. (1964), The dynamics of bureaucracy (revised edn; Chicago: University of Chicago Press).Google Scholar
  4. Buntz, C. G. (1981), ‘Problems and issues in human service productivity improvement’, Public Productivity Review, 5, pp. 299–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chitwood, S. R. (1974), ‘Social equity and social service productivity’, Public Administration Review, 34, pp. 29–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fukuhara, R. S. (1977), ‘Productivity improvement in cities’, Municipal Year Book ( Washington, DC: International City Management Association).Google Scholar
  7. Halpern, J. and P. R. Binner (1981), ‘A model for an output value analysis of mental health programs’, in M. L. Gruber (ed.), Management systems in the human services ( Philadelphia: Temple University Press ), pp. 158–69.Google Scholar
  8. Hatry, H. P. (1980), ‘Performance measurement principles and techniques: An overview for local government’, Public Productivity Review, 4, pp. 312–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hatry, H. P., et al. (1977), How effective are your community services? ( Washington, DC: Urban Institute).Google Scholar
  10. Kelly, R. M. (1980), ‘Ideology, effectiveness, and public sector productivity: With illustrations from the field of higher education’, Journal of Social Issues, 36, pp. 76–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Koss, M., et al. (1979), Social services: What happens to the clients? ( Washington, DC: Urban Institute).Google Scholar
  12. Krueckeberg, D. A. and A. L. Silvers (1974), Urban planning analysis: Methods and models ( New York: John Wiley).Google Scholar
  13. Lauth, T. P. (1981), ‘The rehabilitation administrator in the budgetary process: Resource acquisition in a changing environment’, in W. G. Emener, R. S. Luck, and S. J. Smith (eds), Rehabilitation administration and supervision ( Baltimore: University Park Press ) pp. 125–45.Google Scholar
  14. Lipsky, M. (1980), Street-level bureaucracy ( New York: Russell Sage Foundation).Google Scholar
  15. Millar, A., H. Hatry and M. Koss (1977), Monitoring the outcomes of social services, vol. II: A review of past research and test activities ( Washington, DC: Urban Institute).Google Scholar
  16. National Commission on Productivity (1973), Opportunities for improving productivity in solid waste collection (Washington, DC).Google Scholar
  17. Okun, A. M. (1975), Equality and efficiency: The big tradeoff ( Washington, DC: Brookings Institute).Google Scholar
  18. Page, B. I. (1983), Who gets what from government ( Berkeley: University of California Press).Google Scholar
  19. Rosen, E. D. (1981), ‘O.K. work: Incorporating quality into the production equation’, Public Productivity Review, 5, pp. 207–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Smits, S. J. and J. G. Ledbetter (1979), ‘The practice of rehabilitation counselling within the administrative structure of the state-federal program’, Journal of Applied Rehabilitation Counselling, 10, pp. 78–84.Google Scholar
  21. Usilaner, B. and E. Soniat (1980), ‘Productivity measurement’, in G. J. Washnis (ed.), Productivity improvement handbook for state and local government ( New York: John Wiley ) pp. 91–114.Google Scholar
  22. Wholey, J. S. (1983), Evaluation and effective public management (Boston: Little, Brown).Google Scholar
  23. Wilenski, P. (1980–1), ‘Efficiency of equity: Competing values in administrative reform’, Policy Studies Journal (Special issue # 4), pp. 1239–49.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Policy Studies Organization 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jeffrey L. Brudney
  • David R. Morgan

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations