Contrasting and explaining purposeful and legitimizing uses of performance information: a mayor’s perspective

References

• Abrahamson, E. 1991. “Managerial Fads and Fashions: The Diffusion and Rejection of Innovation.” California Management Review 16 (3): 586–612.
   Google Scholar
• Abrahamson, E. 1996. “Management Fashion.” Academy of Management Review 21 (1): 254–285. doi:10.5465/amr.1996.9602161572.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anessi-Pessina, E., and M. Sicilia. 2015. “Biased Budgeting in the Public Sector: Evidence from Italian Local Governments.” Local Government Studies 41 (6): 819–840. doi:10.1080/03003930.2015.1012194.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ansari, S., and K. J. Euske. 1987. “Rational, Rationalizing, and Reifying Uses of Accounting Data in Organizations.” Accounting, Organizations and Society 12 (6): 549–570. doi:10.1016/0361-3682(87)90008-0.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ashworth, R., G. Boyne, and R. Delbridge. 2009. “Escape from the Iron Cage? Organizational Change and Isomorphic Pressures in the Public Sector.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 19 (1): 165–187. doi:10.1093/jopart/mum038.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Askim, J. 2007. “Local Government by Numbers: Who Makes Use of Performance Information, When, and for What Purposes?” PhD diss., University of Oslo.
   Google Scholar
• Avellaneda, C. N. 2008. “Municipal Performance: Does Mayoral Quality Matter?” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 19 (2): 285–312. doi:10.1093/jopart/mun001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Avellaneda, C. N. 2012. “Do Politics or Mayors‘ Demographics Matter for Municipal Revenue Expansion?” Public Management Review 14 (8): 1061–1086. doi:10.1080/14719037.2012.662442.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Behn, R. D. 1998. “The New Public Management Paradigm and the Search for Democratic Accountability.” International Public Management Journal 1 (2): 131–164. doi:10.1016/S1096-7494(99)80088-9.
   Google Scholar
• Behn, R. D. 2003. “Why Measure Performance? Different Purposes Require Different Measures.” Public Administration Review 63 (5): 586–606. doi:10.1111/puar.2003.63.issue-5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berry, F. S., and W. D. Berry. 2007. “Innovation and Diffusion Models in Policy Research.” In Theories of the Policy Process, edited by P. A. Sabatier, 223–260. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bloechliger, H., and D. King. 2005. “Fiscal Autonomy of Sub-Central Governments.” OECD Working Papers on Fiscal Federalism, No. 2. Paris: OECD Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Boyne, G. A., J. S. Gould-Williams, J. Law, and R. M. Walker. 2005. “Explaining the Adoption of Innovation: An Empirical Analysis of Public Management Reform.” Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 23 (3): 419–435. doi:10.1068/c40m.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brignall, S., and S. Modell. 2000. “An Institutional Perspective on Performance Measurement and Management in the ‘New Public Sector’.” Management Accounting Research 11 (3): 281–306. doi:10.1006/mare.2000.0136.
   Google Scholar
• Burchell, S., C. Clubb, A. Hopwood, J. Hughes, and J. Nahapiet. 1980. “The Roles of Accounting in Organizations and Society.” Accounting, Organizations and Society 5 (1): 5–27. doi:10.1016/0361-3682(80)90017-3.
   Google Scholar
• Carruthers, B. G. 1995. “Accounting, Ambiguity, and the New Institutionalism.” Accounting, Organizations and Society 20 (4): 313–328. doi:10.1016/0361-3682(95)96795-6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cavalluzzo, K. S., and C. D. Ittner. 2004. “Implementing Performance Measurement Innovations: Evidence from Government.” Accounting, Organizations and Society 29 (3–4): 243–267. doi:10.1016/S0361-3682(03)00013-8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chapman, C. S. 1997. “Reflection on a Contingent View of Accounting.” Accounting, Organizations and Society 22 (2): 189–205. doi:10.1016/S0361-3682(97)00001-9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chenhall, R. H. 2003. “Management Control Systems Design within Its Organizational Context: Findings from Contingency-Based Research and Directions for the Future.” Management Science 28 (2/3): 127–169.
   Google Scholar
• Child, J., and R. Mansfield. 1972. “Technology, Size, and Organization Structure.” Sociology 6 (3): 369–393. doi:10.1177/003803857200600304.
   Google Scholar
• Chun, Y., and H. Rainey. 2005. “Goal Ambiguity in U.S. Federal Agencies.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 15 (1): 1–30. doi:10.1093/jopart/mui001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Conway, J. M., and C. E. Lance. 2010. “What Reviewers Should Expect from Authors regarding Common Method Bias in Organizational Research.” Journal of Business Psychology 25: 325–334. doi:10.1007/s10869-010-9181-6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cortina, J. 1993. “What Is Coefficient Alpha? An Examination of Theory and Applications.” Journal of Applied Psychology 78 (1): 98–104.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Lancer, J. P., and M. Holzer. 2001. “Promoting the Utilization of Performance Measures in Public Organizations: An Empirical Study of Factors Affecting Adoption and Implementation.” Public Administration Review 61 (6): 693–708. doi:10.1111/0033-3352.00140.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deshpande, R., and F. E. Webster Jr. 1989. “Organizational Culture and Marketing: Defining the Research Agenda.” The Journal of Marketing 53 (1): 3–15. doi:10.1177/002224298905300102.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DiMaggio, P. J., and W. W. Powell. 1983. “The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields.” American Sociological Review 48 (2): 147–160. doi:10.2307/2095101.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Downs, G. W., and L. W. Mohr. 1976. “Conceptual Issues in the Study of Innovation.” Administrative Science Quarterly 21 (4): 700–714. doi:10.2307/2391725.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dunk, A. S., and A. F. Lysons. 1997. “An Analysis of Departmental Effectiveness, Participatory Budget Control Processes and Environmental Dimensionality within Competing Value Framework: A Public Sector Study.” Financial Accountability and Management 13 (1): 1–5. doi:10.1111/1468-0408.00023.
   Google Scholar
• Einstein, K. L., and D. M. Glick. 2018. “Mayors, Partisanship, and Redistribution: Evidence Directly from US Mayors.” Urban Affairs Review 54 (1): 74–106. doi:10.1177/1078087416674829.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fargnoli, R. 2014. “Austria’s Fiscal Rules: Climbing the Mountain Towards Effective Fiscal Relations.” ECFIN Country Focus 11 (1).
   Google Scholar
• Feldman, M. S., and J. G. March. 1981. “Information in Organizations as Signal and Symbol.” Administrative Science Quarterly 26 (2): 171–186. doi:10.2307/2392467.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fligstein, N. 1997. “Social Skills and Institutional Theory.” American Behavioral Scientist 40 (4): 397–405. doi:10.1177/0002764297040004003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ford, J. D., and D. A. Baucus. 1987. “Organizational Adaptation to Performance Downturns: An Interpretation-Based Perspective.” Academy of Management Review 12 (2): 366–380. doi:10.5465/amr.1987.4307976.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Franklin, A. L. 2000. “An Examination of Bureaucratic Reactions to Institutional Controls.” Public Performance and Management Review 24 (1): 8–21. doi:10.2307/3381073.
   Google Scholar
• French, P. E., and D. H. Folz. 2004. “Executive Behavior and Decision Making in Small US Cities.” The American Review of Public Administration 34 (1): 52–66. doi:10.1177/0275074003259186.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giacomini, D., M. Sicilia, and I. Steccolini. 2016. “Contextualizing Politicians’ Uses of Accounting Information: Reassurance and Ammunition.” Public Money & Management 36 (7): 483–490. doi:10.1080/09540962.2016.1237128.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gioia, D. A., and K. Chittipeddi. 1991. “Sensemaking and Sensegiving in Strategic Change Initiation.” Strategic Management Journal 12 (6): 433–448. doi:10.1002/(ISSN)1097-0266.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Green, S. 1988. “Strategy, Organizational Culture and Symbolism.” Long Range Planning 21 (4): 121–129. doi:10.1016/0024-6301(88)90016-7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gruening, G. 2001. “Origin and Theoretical Basis of New Public Management.” International Public Management Journal 4 (1): 1–25. doi:10.1016/S1096-7494(01)00041-1.
   Google Scholar
• Hammerschmid, G., S. Van de Walle, R. Andrews, and P. Bezes. 2016. Public Administration Reforms in Europe: The View from the Top. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Henri, J. F. 2006. “Management Control Systems and Strategy: A Resource-Based Perspective.” Society 31 (6): 529–558.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ho, A. T. K. 2005. “Accounting for the Value of Performance Measurement from the Perspective of Midwestern Mayors.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 16 (2): 217–237. doi:10.1093/jopart/mui046.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ho, A. T. K. 2006. “Accounting for the Value of Performance Measurement from the Perspective of City Mayors.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 16 (2): 217–237. doi:10.1093/jopart/mui046.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hood, C. 1991. “A Public Management for All Seasons.” Public Administration 69 (1): 3–19. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9299.1991.tb00779.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hughes, O. E. 2012. Public Management and Administration: An Introduction. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Jacobs, K. 2013. “Making Sense of Social Practice: Theoretical Pluralism in Public Sector Accounting Research: A Reply.” Financial Accountability and Management 29 (1): 111–115. doi:10.1111/faam.12005.
   Google Scholar
• Jensen, M. C., and W. H. Meckling. 1976. “Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behaviour. Agency Costs and Ownership Structure.” Journal of Financial Economics 3 (4): 305–360. doi:10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-X.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johansson, T., and S. Siverbo. 2009. “Explaining the Utilization of Relative Performance Evaluation in Local Government: A Multi-Theoretical Study Using Data from Sweden.” Financial Accountability and Management 25 (2): 197–224. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0408.2009.00474.x.
   Google Scholar
• Johansson, T., and S. Siverbo. 2009. “Explaining The Utilization of Relative Performance Evaluation in Local Government: A Multi-theoretical Study Using Data from Sweden.” Financial Accountability & Management 25 (2): 197–224. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0408.2009.00474.x.
   Google Scholar
• Krakower, J. Y., and R. F. Zammuto. 1991. “Quantitative and Qualitative Studies of Organizational Culture.” In Research in Organizational Change and Development, edited by R. W. Woodman and W. A. Passmore, 83–114. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kroll, A. 2014. “Why Performance Information Use Varies among Public Managers: Testing Manager-Related Explanations.” International Public Management Journal 17 (2): 174–201. doi:10.1080/10967494.2014.905409.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kroll, A. 2015a. “Explaining the Use of Performance Information by Public Managers: A Planned-Behavior Approach.” The American Review of Public Administration 45 (2): 201–215. doi:10.1177/0275074013486180.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kroll, A. 2015b. “Drivers of Performance Information Use: Systematic Literature Review and Directions for Future Research.” Public Performance & Management Review 38 (3): 459–486. doi:10.1080/15309576.2015.1006469.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kroll, A. 2015c. “Drivers of Performance Information Use: Systematic Literature Review and Directions for Future Research.” Public Performance And Management Review 38 (3): 459–486. doi:10.1080/15309576.2015.1006469
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuhlmann, S. 2010. “Vergleichende Verwaltungswissenschaft: Verwaltungssysteme, Verwaltungskulturen und Verwaltungsreformen in Internationaler Perspektive.” In Vergleichende Regierungslehre. Eine Einführung, edited by H.-J. Lauth, 140–160. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Lawrence, P. R., and J. W. Lorsch. 1967. Organization and Environment. Boston: Harvard University Graduate School of Business Administration.
   Google Scholar
• Lawrence, T. B., and R. Suddaby. 2006. Handbook of Organization Studies, edited by S. R. Clegg, C. Hardy, T. B. Lawrence, and W. R. Nord., 215–254. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Liguori, M., M. Sicilia, and I. Steccolini. 2011. “Politicans and Administrators: Two Characters in Search for a Role.” Paper presented at the Fourteenth Annual Conference of the International Research Society for Public Management, Dublin, April 11–13.
   Google Scholar
• Liguori, M., M. Sicilia, and I. Steccolini. 2012. “Some like It Non-Financial.. Politicians’ and Managers’ Views on the Importance of Performance Information.” Public Management Review 14 (7): 903–922. doi:10.1080/14719037.2011.650054.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lounsbury, M. 2008. “Institutional Rationality and Practice Variation: New Directions in the Institutional Analysis of Practice.” Accounting, Organizations and Society 33 (4–5): 349–361. doi:10.1016/j.aos.2007.04.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marcuccio, M., and I. Steccolini. 2005. “Social and Environmental Reporting in Local Authorities.” Public Management Review 7 (2): 155–176. doi:10.1080/14719030500090444.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Markus, M. L., and J. Pfeffer. 1983. “Power and the Design and Implementation of Accounting and Control Systems.” Accounting, Organizations and Society 8 (2–3): 205–218. doi:10.1016/0361-3682(83)90028-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meier, K. J., and L. J. O’Toole. 2013. “Subjective Organizational Performance and MeasurementError: Common Source Bias and Spurious Relationships.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 23 (2): 429–456. doi:10.1093/jopart/mus057.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Melkers, J. E., and K. G. Willoughby. 2005. “Models of Performance-Measurement Use in Local Governments: Understanding Budgeting, Communication, and Lasting Effects.” Public Administration Review 65 (2): 180–191. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2005.00443.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meyer, J. W., and B. Rowan. 1977. “Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony.” American Journal of Sociology 83 (2): 340–363. doi:10.1086/226550.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Modell, S. 2005a. “Performance Management in the Public Sector: Past Experiences, Current Practices and Future Challenges.” Australian Accounting Review 15 (3): 56–66. doi:10.1111/j.1835-2561.2005.tb00304.x.
   Google Scholar
• Modell, S. 2005b. “Students as Consumers? an Institutional Field-Level Analysis of the Construction of Performance Measurement Practices.” Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 18 (4): 537–563. doi:10.1108/09513570510609351.
   Google Scholar
• Modell, S. 2009. “Institutional Research on Performance Measurement and Management in the Public Sector Accounting Literature: A Review and Assessment.” Financial Accountability and Management 25 (3): 277–304. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0408.2009.00477.x.
   Google Scholar
• Mouritzen, P. E., and J. H. Svara. 2002. Leadership at the Apex: Politicians and Administrators in Western Local Governments. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
   Google Scholar
• Moynihan, D. P. 2004. “Why and How Do State Governments Adopt and Implement ‘Managing for Results’ Reforms?” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 15 (2): 219–243. doi:10.1093/jopart/mui012.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moynihan, D. P. 2005. “What Do We Talk about When We Talk about Performance? Dialogue Theory and Performance Budgeting.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 16 (2): 151–168. doi:10.1093/jopart/muj003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moynihan, D. P. 2009. “Through a Glass, Darkly: Understanding the Effects of Performance Regimes.” Public Performance & Management Review 32 (4): 592–603. doi:10.2753/PMR1530-9576320409.
   Google Scholar
• Moynihan, D. P. 2016. “Political Use of Performance Data.” Public Money & Management 36 (7): 479–481.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moynihan, D. P., and N. Landuyt. 2009. “How Do Public Organizations Learn? Bridging Structural and Cultural Divides.” Public Administration Review 69 (6): 97–105. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2009.02067.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moynihan, D. P., and P. W. Ingraham. 2003. “Look for the Silver Lining: Managing for Results in State Government.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 13 (4): 469–490. doi:10.1093/jopart/mug032.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moynihan, D. P., and P. W. Ingraham. 2004. “Integrative Leadership in the Public Sector: A Model of Performance Information Use.” Administration & Society 36 (4): 427–453. doi:10.1177/0095399704266748.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moynihan, D. P., and S. K. Pandey. 2005. “Testing How Management Matters in an Era of Government by Performance Management.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 15 (3): 421–439. doi:10.1093/jopart/mui016.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moynihan, D. P., and S. K. Pandey. 2010. “The Big Question for Performance Management: Why Do Managers Use Performance Information?” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 20 (4): 849–866. doi:10.1093/jopart/muq004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moynihan, D. P., S. K. Pandey, and B. E. Wright. 2012. “Prosocial Values and Performance Management Theory: Linking Perceived Social Impact and Performance Information Use.” Governance 25 (3): 463–483. doi:10.1111/gove.2012.25.issue-3.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murphy, K., and C. O., Davidshofer. 1988. Psychological Testing: Principles and Applications. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Newell, C., and D. N. Ammons. 1995. “Role Emphases of City Managers and Other Municipal Executives.” In Ideal and Practice in Council Manager Government, edited by H. G. Frederickson, 97–107. Washington, D. C.: International City County Management Association.
   Google Scholar
• Nitzl, C., M. Sicilia, and I. Steccolini. 2018. “Exploring the Links between Different Performance Information Uses, NPM Cultural Orientation, and Organizational Performance in the Public Sector.” Public Management Review. doi:10.1080/14719037.2018.1508609.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olson, O., J. Guthrie, and C. Humphrey. 1998. Global Warning! Debating International Developments in New Public Financial Management. Oslo: Cappelen Akademisk Forlag.
   Google Scholar
• Pleschberger, W. 2003. “Cities and Municipalities in the Austrian Political System since the 1990s. New Developments between ‘Efficiency’ and ‘Democracy’.” In Reforming Local Government in Europe. Closing the Gap between Democracy and Efficiency, edited by N. Kersting and A. Vetter, 113–135. Opladen: Leke + Budrich.
   Google Scholar
• Poister, T. H., and G. Streib. 1999. “Performance Measurement in Municipal Government: Assessing the State of the Practice.” Public Administration Review 59 (4): 325–335. doi:10.2307/3110115.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Poister, T. H., O. Pasha, and L. Edwards. 2013. “Does Performance Management Lead to Better Outcomes? Evidence for the U.S. Public Transit Industry.” Public Administration Review 73 (4): 625–636. doi:10.1111/puar.2013.73.issue-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pollitt, C., and G. Bouckaert. 2011. “Public Management Reform: A Comparative Analysis – New Public Management, Governance, and the Neo – Weberian State.” International Review of Administrative Sciences 78 (1): 180–182.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Powell, R. 1991. “Absolute and Relative Gains in International Relations Theory.” The American Political Science Review 85 (4): 1303–1320. doi:10.2307/1963947.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Quinn, R. E., and J. Rohrbaugh. 1983. “A Spatial Model of Effectiveness Criteria: Towards A Competing Values Approach to Organizational Analysis.” Management Science 29 (3): 363–377. doi:10.1287/mnsc.29.3.363.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rabovsky, T. 2014. “Using Data to Manage for Performance at Public Universities.” Public Administration Review 74 (2): 260–272. doi:10.1111/puar.2014.74.issue-2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saliterer, I., and S. Korac. 2013. “Performance Information Use by Politicians and Public Managers for Internal Control and External Accountability Purposes.” Critical Perspectives on Accounting 24: 502–517. doi:10.1016/j.cpa.2013.08.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schedler, K. 2003. “‘…And Politics?’ Public Management Developments in the Light of Two Rationalities.” Public Management Review 5 (4): 533–550. doi:10.1080/1471903032000178572.
   Google Scholar
• Schein, E. H. 1985. Organizational Culture and Leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Schneiberg, M., and E. S. Clemens. 2006. “The Typical Tools for the Job: Research Strategies in Institutional Analysis.” Sociological Theory 24 (3): 195–227. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9558.2006.00288.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scott, W. R. 2008. “Approaching Adulthood: The Maturing of Institutional Theory.” Theory and Society 37 (5): 427–442. doi:10.1007/s11186-008-9067-z.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Speklé, R. F., and F. H. M. Verbeeten. 2014. “The Use of Performance Measurement Systems in the Public Sector: Effects on Performance.” Management Accounting Research 25 (2): 131–146. doi:10.1016/j.mar.2013.07.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Svara, J. H. 2006. “The Search for Meaning in Political-Administrative Relations in Local Government.” International Journal of Public Administration 29 (12): 1065–1090. doi:10.1080/01900690600854704.
   Google Scholar
• Taylor, J. 2009. “Strengthening the Link between Performance Measurement and Decision Making.” Public Administration 87 (4): 853–871. doi:10.1111/padm.2009.87.issue-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ter Bogt, H., and G. van Helden. 2000. “Accounting Change in Dutch Government: Exploring the Gap between Expectations and Realizations.” Management Accounting Research 11 (2): 263–279. doi:10.1006/mare.2000.0132.
   Google Scholar
• Thompson, J. 1967. Organizations in Action: Social Science Bases of Administrative Theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Van Helden, G. J. 2005. “Researching Public Sector Transformation: The Role of Management Accounting.” Financial Accountability and Management 21 (1): 99–133. doi:10.1111/fam.2005.21.issue-1.
   Google Scholar
• Van Helden, G. J., A. Johnsen, and J. Vakkuri. 2008. “Distinctive Research Patterns on Public Sector Performance Measurement of Public Administration and Accounting Disciplines.” Public Management Review 10 (5): 641–651. doi:10.1080/14719030802264366.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Helden, J. 2016. “Literature Review and Challenging Research Agenda on Politicians’ Use of Accounting Information.” Public Money & Management 36 (7): 531–538.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verbeeten, F. H. M., and R. F. Speklé. 2015. “Management Control, Results-Oriented Culture and Public Sector Performance: Empirical Evidence on New Public Management.” Organization Studies 36 (7): 953–978. doi:10.1177/0170840615580014.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker, R. M. 2006. “Innovation Type and Diffusion: An Empirical Analysis of Local Government.” Public Administration 84 (2): 311–335. doi:10.1111/padm.2006.84.issue-2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker, R. M., C. N. Avellaneda, and F. S. Berry. 2011. “Exploring the Diffusion of Innovation among High and Low Innovative Localities.” Public Management Review 13 (1): 95–125. doi:10.1080/14719037.2010.501616.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weber, M. 1978. Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Weyenberg, E., and S. Kuhlmann. 2018. “Comparative Local Government Research: Theoretical Concepts and Empirical Findings from a European Perspective.” In The Palgrave Handbook of Public Administration and Management in Europe, edited by E. Ongaro and S. van Thiel, 841–864. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Williamson, O. E. 1981. “The Economics of Organizations: The Transaction Cost Approach.” American Journal of Sociology 87 (3): 548–577. doi:10.1086/227496.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wright, B. E. 2004. “The Role of Work Context in Work Motivation: A Public Sector Application of Goal and Social Cognitive Theories.” Public Administration 14 (1): 59–78.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang, K., and J. Y. Hsieh. 2007. “Managerial Effectiveness of Government Performance Measurement: Testing a Middle-Range Model.” Public Administration Review 67 (5): 861–879. doi:10.1111/puar.2007.67.issue-5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar