Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Politics of Measuring Public Sector Performance: Productivity and the Public Organization

  • Chapter
Promoting Productivity in the Public Sector

Part of the book series: Policy Studies Organization Series ((PSOS))

Abstract

At a time when government budgets are being reduced and public organizations are being exhorted to improve their productivity, a probe of the language of performance appraisal is in order, for the way contests over the measurement of public performance affect the conduct of public organizations raises issues that are central to representation in a democratic state.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Adam, E., Jr (1979), ‘Quality and productivity in delivering and administering public services’, Public Productivity Review, 3 (4), pp. 26–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adams, H. W. (1975), ‘Solutions as problems: The case of productivity’, Public Productivity Review, 1 (1), pp. 36–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allison, G. T. (1971), Essence of decision: Explaining the Cuban missile crisis (Boston: Little, Brown).

    Google Scholar 

  • Argyris, C. (1964), Integrating the individual and the organization ( New York: Wiley).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bahl, R. W. and J. Burkhead (1977), ‘Productivity and the measurement of public output’, in Charles H. Levine (ed.), Managing human resources: A challenge to urban governments ( Beverly Hills: Sage ) pp. 253–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Balk, W. L. (1975), Improving government productivity: Some policy perspectives ( Beverly Hills: Sage).

    Google Scholar 

  • Barzun, J. ( 1981; November 5), ‘The wasteland of American education’, New York Review of Books, pp. 34–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Best, M. and W. E. Connolly (1976), The politicized economy ( Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bish, R. L. and V. Ostrom (1973), Understanding urban government: Metropolitan reform reconsidered ( Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research).

    Google Scholar 

  • Center for National Security Studies. (1970), Law and disorder II ( New York: Field and New World Foundation).

    Google Scholar 

  • Connolly, W. E. (1974), The terms of political discourse (Lexington, Mass: D.C. Heath).

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalton, T. C. (1980), An analysis of evaluation design issues for the consolidated employment and training project, Tacoma, Washington: A working paper ( Seattle University, Institute of Public Service).

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalton, T. C. (ed.) (1981), Coordinating the employment and training system: The implementation and evaluation of organizational innovations: Conference Proceedings ( Seattle University, Institute of Public Service ).

    Google Scholar 

  • Deniston, O. L., I. M. Rosenstock, W. Welch and V. A. Getting (1972), ‘Evaluation of program effectiveness and program efficiency’, in F. Lyden and E. Miller (eds), Planning, programming, budgeting, pp. 141–70 ( Chicago: Markham ).

    Google Scholar 

  • Dolbear, K. M. (1974a), ‘The impacts of public policy’, Political Science Annual, 5, pp. 90–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dolbear, K. M. (1974b), Political change in the United States: A framework for analysis ( New York: McGraw-Hill).

    Google Scholar 

  • Dolbear, K. M. and P. E. Hammond (1971), The school prayer decisions: From court policy to local practice ( Chicago: University of Chicago Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Downs, A. (1967), Inside bureaucracy (Boston: Little, Brown).

    Google Scholar 

  • Easton, D. (1965), A framework for political analysis ( Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall).

    Google Scholar 

  • Elmore, R. F. (1978), ‘Organizational models of social program implementation’, Public Policy, 26 (2), pp. 185–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elmore, R. F. (1979), ‘Backward mapping: Implementation research and policy decisions’, Political Science Quarterly, 94 (1), pp. 601–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Employment and Training Reporter ( 1981a; 12 December), ‘Senator Quayle’s proposal for employment and training’, ( Washington, D.C.: Bureau of National Affairs ) pp. 297–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Employment and Training Reporter (198lb; 23 December), ‘Specifications for a House Bill’ (Washington, DC: Bureau of National Affairs) pp. 378–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Employment and Training Reporter ( 1982a; 6 January), ‘CETA should retain current programs, boost state role, hispanic group says’ ( Washington, DC: Bureau of National Affairs ) pp. 389–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Employment and Training Reporter ( 1982b; 20 January), ‘Private sector role in CETA programs will remain limited, report asserts’ ( Washington, DC: Bureau of National Affairs ) pp. 453–5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ervin, O. L. (1978), ‘A conceptual niche for municipal productivity’, Public Relations Review, 3 (2), pp. 15–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Etzioni, A. (1964), Modern organizations ( Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilder, G. (1975), ‘Public sector productivity’, Public Productivity Review, 1(1), pp. 4–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, E. K. (1972), ‘Productivity: The New York City approach’, Public Administration Review, 32 (6), pp. 784–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hatry, H. P. (1980), ‘Performance measurement principles and techniques: An overview for local government’, Public Productivity Review, 4 (4), pp. 312–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, F. O’R. (1977), Productivity in local government ( Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayward, N. (1976), ‘The productivity challenge’, Public Administration Review, 36 (5), pp. 544–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayward, N. and G. Kuper (1978),‘ The national economy and productivity in government’, Public Administration Review, 38 (1), pp. 2–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hogan, J. B. and S. K. Hogan (1980), The challenge of consolidation: The consolidated employment and training system in Tacoma, Washington: A case study ( Seattle University, Institute of Public Service).

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacoby, J. E. (1980), The American prosecutor: A search for identity ( Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kimberly, J. R. (1980a), ‘Initiation, innovation and institutionalization in the creation process’, in J. R. Kimberly and R. H. Miles (eds), The organizational life cycle ( San Francisco: Jossey-Boss ) pp. 18–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kimberly, J. R. (1980b), ‘The life cycle analogy and the study of organizations: Introduction’, in J. R. Kimberly and R. H. Miles (eds), The organizational life cycle ( San Francisco: Jossey-Boss ) pp. 1–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kimberly, J. R. and R. H. Miles (eds) (1980), The organizational life cycle: Issues in the creation, transformation and decline of organizations ( San Francisco: Jossey-Boss ).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kull, D. C. (1978), ‘Productivity programs in the federal government’, Public Administration Review, 38 (1), pp. 5–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leathers, C. G. (1979), ‘Language barriers in public productivity analysis: the case of efficiency and effectiveness’, Public Productivity Review, 3 (4), pp. 638.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lowi, T. J. (1979), The end of liberalism, 2nd edn ( New York: W. W. Norton Company).

    Google Scholar 

  • Maclntyre, A. (1981), After virtue ( Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Mann, L. D. (1979), ‘Planning behavior and professional policymaking activity’, in R. W. Burchell and G. Sternlieb (eds), Planning theory in the 1980’s ( New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University, Center for Urban Policy Research ) pp. 113–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mann, S. Z. (1980), ‘The politics of productivity: State and local focus’, Public Productivity Review, 4(4), pp. 352–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marchand, D. (1980), The politics of privacy: Computers and criminal justice records ( Arlington, VA: Information Resources Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Mark, J. A. (1972), ‘Meanings and measures of productivity’, Public Administration Review, 32 (6), pp. 747–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miles, R. H. and W. A. Randolph (1980), ‘Influence of organizational learning styles on early development’, in J. R. Kimberly and R. H. Miles (eds), The organizational life cycle ( San Francisco: Jossey-Boss ), pp. 44–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milner, N. A. (1971), The court and local law enforcement: The impact of Miranda ( Beverly Hills: Sage).

    Google Scholar 

  • Mirengoff, W., L. Rindler, H. Greenspan and S. Seablom (1980), CETA: Assessment of public service employment programs (Washington, DC:National Academy of Sciences)

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, P. M. (1981), ‘Academia and the federal government’,Policy Studies Journal, 10(1), pp. 70 —84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Council on Employment Policy (1981), CETA’s results and their implications (Washington, DC).

    Google Scholar 

  • Navasky, V. (1976), Law enforcement: The federal role ( New York: McGraw-Hill).

    Google Scholar 

  • Neiman, M. and C. Lovell (1981), ‘Mandating as a policy issue: the definitional problem’, Policy Studies Journal, 9 (5), pp. 667–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, B. J. (1978), ‘Setting the agenda: the case of child abuse’, in J. V. May and A. B. Wildaysky (eds), The Policy Cycle ( Beverly Hills: Sage ) pp. 17–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, E. (1971), ‘Institutional arrangements and the measurement of policy consequences: Applications to evaluating police performance’, Urban Affairs Quarterly, 6, pp. 447–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Packer, H. L. (1968), The limits of the criminal sanction ( Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, P. G. (1972), ‘Productivity in government and the American economy ’,Public Administration Review 32 (6), pp. 740–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quinn, R. E. (1978), ‘Productivity and the process of organizational improvement: Why we cannot talk to each other’, Public Administration Review, 38 (1), pp. 41–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rivlin, A. M. (1971), Systematic thinking for social action ( Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution).

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbloom, R. (1973), ‘The real productivity crisis is in government’, Harvard Business Review, 32 (6), pp. 156–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sabatier, P. A. and D. A. Mazmanian (1980), ‘The implementation of public policy: A framework of analysis’, Policy Studies Journal 8(4), pp. 538–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salamon, L. M. (1981), ‘The goals of reorganization: A framework for analysis’Administration and Society 12(4), pp. 471–500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silverman, E. (1973), ‘Productivity in government: A note of caution’, Midwest Review of Public Administration, 7 (3), pp. 143–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skoler, D. T. (1977), Organizing the non-system ( Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath).

    Google Scholar 

  • Stromsdorfer, E. (1981), Minnesota work-equity project: Second interim report, a summary of findings ( Cambridge, MA: Apt Associates).

    Google Scholar 

  • Taggart, R. (1981), A fisherman’s guide: An assessment of training and remediation strategies ( Kalamazoo, MI: Upjohn).

    Google Scholar 

  • Van de Ven, A. H. (1980), ‘Early planning, implementation and performance of new organizations’, in J. R. Kimberly and R. H. Miles (eds), The organizational life cycle ( San Francisco: Jossey-Boss ) pp. 83–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Horn, C. (1979). Policy implementation in the federal system ( Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath).

    Google Scholar 

  • Wasby, S. L. (1970), The impact of the United States Supreme Court: Some perspectives ( Homewood, IL: Dorsey).

    Google Scholar 

  • Whetten, D. A. (1980), ‘Sources, responses and effects of organizational decline’, in J. R. Kimberly and R. H. Miles (eds), The organizational life cycle ( San Francisco: Jossey-Boss ) pp. 342–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, W. (1971), Social policy research and analysis: The experience in federal social agencies ( New York: American Elsevier).

    Google Scholar 

  • Wittgenstein, L. (1953), Philosophical investigations ( New York: Macmillan).

    Google Scholar 

  • Wittgenstein, L. (1969), On certainty ( New York: Harper Torchbooks, originally written 1922 ).

    Google Scholar 

  • Yamada, G. T. (1972), ‘Improving management effectiveness in the federal government’, Public Administration Review, 32 (6), pp. 764–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K., K. A. Heald and M. E. Vogel (1977), Tinkering with the system: Technological innovations in state and local services ( Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath).

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. and D. Yates (1974), Street-level governments: Assessing decentralization and urban services (Santa Monica: RAND Corporation, R-1527—NSF).

    Google Scholar 

  • Zaltman, G., et al. (1973), Innovations and organizations ( New York: Wiley Interscience).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Thomas C. Dalton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Linda C. Dalton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Public Affairs, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona, USA

    Rita Mae Kelly PhD (Professor) (Professor)

Copyright information

© 1988 Policy Studies Organization

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Dalton, T.C., Dalton, L.C. (1988). The Politics of Measuring Public Sector Performance: Productivity and the Public Organization. In: Kelly, R.M. (eds) Promoting Productivity in the Public Sector. Policy Studies Organization Series. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-08885-0_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation