Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Promoting Productivity in the Public Sector pp 127–139Cite as

Palgrave Macmillan

Obstacles to Doing More with Less: Illustrations from the Kansas Experience

  • Chapter

  • 13 Accesses

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

Abstract

State budgeting reforms are often instituted with a strong desire to improve the productivity of state government. This article examines the connections between productivity and budgeting reforms. A decision-making framework is developed with which to suggest potential obstacles to successful implementation of budget reforms. Using examples from the Kansas experience, these obstacles are systematically examined.

This is a preview of subscription content, 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

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Allison, G. T. (1971), Essence of decision (Boston: Little, Brown).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bachrach, P. and M. S. Baratz (1970), Power and poverty: Theory and practice ( New York: Oxford University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bahl, R. W. and J. Burkhead (1977), ‘Productivity and the measurement of public output’, in C. Levine (ed.) Managing Human Resources: A Challenge to Urban Government (Beverly Hills, California: Sage ), pp. 253–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bozeman, B. and J. D. Straussman (1982), ‘Shrinking budgets and shrinkage of budgetary theory’, Public Administration Review, 42, pp. 509–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braybrooke, D. and C. E. Lindblom (1963), A strategy of decision ( Glencoe, IL: The Free Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Caiden, N. (1981), ‘Public budgeting amidst uncertainty and instability’, Public Budgeting and Finance, 1, pp. 6–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caiden, N. (1984), ‘The new rules of the federal budget game’, Public Administration Review, 44, pp. 109–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cyert, R. and J. March (1963), A behavioral theory of the firm ( Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall).

    Google Scholar 

  • Forester, J. (1984), ‘Bounded rationality and the politics of muddling through’, Public Administration Review, 44, pp. 23–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, G. D., J. S. Miller, L. B. Mohr and B. C. Vladeck (1977), ‘Developing public policy theory: Perspectives from empirical research’, American Political Science Review, 71, pp. 1532–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gulick, L. and L. Urwick (eds) (1937), Papers on the science of administration ( New York: Institute of Public Administration ).

    Google Scholar 

  • Harkin, J. M. (1982), ‘Effectiveness budgeting: The limits of budget reform’, Policy Studies Review, 2, pp. 112–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindblom, C. (1959), ‘The science of muddling through’, Public Administration Review, 19, pp. 79–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • March, J. G. and and H. A. Simon (1958), Organizations (New York: J. Wiley).

    Google Scholar 

  • Muchmore, L. and H. Duncan (1982), The Kansas budget process: Concept and practice (Topeka, Kansas: Capital Complex Center).

    Google Scholar 

  • Nagel, S. S. (1984), Public policy: Goals, means, and methods ( New York: St. Martin’s Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • National Governors’ Association, Office of Research and Development ( 1983; June), Fiscal survey of the states 1983 ( Washington, DC: National Governors’ Association ).

    Google Scholar 

  • Rein, M. (1976), Social science and public policy ( New York: Pengu in Books).

    Google Scholar 

  • Schattschneider, E. E. (1960), The semisovereign people ( Hinsdale, IL: The Dryden Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Schick, A. and H. Harry (1982), ‘Zero base budgeting: The manager’s budget’, Public Budgeting and Finance, 2, pp. 72–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A. (1975), Administrative behaviour ( New York: Macmillan).

    Google Scholar 

  • Swiss, J. E. (1983), ‘Establishing a management system: The interaction of power shifts and personality under federal MBO’, Public Administration Review, 43, pp. 238–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wildaysky, A. (1966), ‘The political economy of efficiency: Cost-benefit analysis, systems analysis, and program budgeting’, Public Administration Review, 26, pp. 292–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wildaysky, A. (1975), The politics of the budgetary process (Boston: Little, Brown).

    Google Scholar 

  • Wildaysky, A. (1979), Speaking truth to power: The art and craft of policy analysis (Boston: Little, Brown).

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, W. (1887), ‘The study of administration’, Political Science Quarterly, 2, pp. 197–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Kim S. Hunt
    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

Hunt, K.S. (1988). Obstacles to Doing More with Less: Illustrations from the Kansas Experience. 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_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation