Performance Management Goldilocks Style: A Transaction Cost Analysis of Incentive Intensity in Performance Regimes

References

• Ammons, D. N. (1995). Overcoming the inadequacies of performance measurement in local government: The case of libraries and leisure services. Public Administration Review, 55(1), 37–47. doi:10.2307/976826
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ammons, D. N., & Rivenbark, W. C. (2008). Factors influencing the use of performance data to improve municipal services: Evidence from the North Carolina benchmarking project. Public Administration Review, 68(2), 304–318. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2007.00864.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barzelay, M., & Thompson, F. (2006). Responsibility budgeting at the Air Force materiel command. Public Administration Review, 66(1), 127–138. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00561.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beckett, L. (2013). America’s most outrageous teacher cheating scandals. New York, NY: Pro Publica. Retrieved from www.propublica.org/article/americas-most-outrageous-teacher-cheating-scandals.
   Google Scholar
• Behn, R. D. (2003). Why measure performance? Different purposes require different measures. Public Administration Review, 63(5), 586–606. doi:10.1111/1540-6210.00322
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Behn, R. D. (2014). The PerformanceStat potential: A leadership strategy for producing results. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.
   Google Scholar
• Berry, F. S., Brower, R. S., & Flowers, G. (2000). Implementing performance accountability in Florida: What changed, what mattered, and what resulted? Public Productivity and Management Review, 23(3), 338–358. doi:10.2307/3380723
   Google Scholar
• Bertelli, A. M. (2006). Motivation crowding and the federal civil servant: Evidence from the US Internal Revenue Service. International Public Management Journal, 9(1), 3–23. doi:10.1080/10967490600625191
   Google Scholar
• Bourdeaux, C. (2008). The problem with programs: multiple perspectives on program structures in Program‐Based Performance‐Oriented budgets. Public Budgeting and Finance, 28(2), 20–47. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5850.2008.00904.x
   Google Scholar
• Bronstein, N. (2014). Police management and quotas: Governance in the CompStat Era. Columbia Journal of Law and Social Problems, 48, 543.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carnoy, M. (2005). Have state accountability and High-Stakes tests influenced student progression rates in high school? Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 24(4), 19–31. doi:10.1111/j.1745-3992.2005.00020.x
   Google Scholar
• Carnoy, M., & Loeb, S. (2002). Does external accountability affect student outcomes? A Cross-State analysis. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(4), 305–331. doi:10.2307/3594120
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Courty, P., Heinrich, C. J., Marschke, G., & Smith, J. (2011). US employment and training programs and performance standards design. In J. J. Heckman, C. J. Heinrich, P. Courty, G. Marschke and J Smith (Eds.), The performance of performance standards (pp. 15–28). Kalamazoo, MI: WE Upjohn Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Cunningham, G. M., & Harris, J. E. (2005). Toward a theory of performance reporting to achieve public sector accountability: A field study. Public Budgeting Finance, 25(2), 15–42. doi:10.1111/j.0275-1100.2005.00359.x
   Google Scholar
• Dee, T., & Jacob, B. A. (2010). Evaluating NCLB. Education Next, 10(3), 54–61.
   Google Scholar
• Dee, T. S., Jacob, B., & Schwartz, N. L. (2013). The effects of NCLB on school resources and practices. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 35(2), 252–279. doi:10.3102/0162373712467080
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dixit, A. K. (1998). The making of economic policy: A transaction-cost politics perspective. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dixit, A. K. (2002). Incentives and organizations in the public sector: An interpretative review. Journal of Human Resources, 37(4), 696–727.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dull, M. (2008). Results-model reform leadership: Questions of credible commitment. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 19(2), 255–284. doi:10.1093/jopart/mum043
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Durant, R. F., Kramer, R., Perry, J. L., Mesch, D., & Paarlberg, L. (2006). Motivating employees in a new governance era: The performance paradigm revisited. Public Administration Review, 66(4), 505–514. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00611.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eterno, J. A., & Silverman, E. B. (2012). The crime numbers game: Management by manipulation. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
   Google Scholar
• Frant, H. (1996). High-powered and low-powered incentives in the public sector. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 6(3), 365–381. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a024317
   Google Scholar
• Frederickson, D. G. (2006). Measuring the performance of the hollow state. Georgetown University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fuller, B., Wright, J., Gesicki, K., & Kang, E. (2007). Gauging growth: How to judge no child left behind? Educational Researcher, 36(5), 268–278. doi:10.3102/0013189X07306556
   Google Scholar
• Gilmour, J. B., & Lewis, D. E. (2006). Does performance budgeting work? An examination of the office of management and budget’s PART scores. Public Administration Review, 66(5), 742–752. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00639.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goertz, M. E. (2005). Implementing the no child left behind act: Challenges for the states. Peabody Journal of Education, 89(2), 73–89. doi:10.1207/S15327930pje8002_5
   Google Scholar
• Goodman, S. F., & Turner, L. J. (2013). The design of teacher incentive pay and educational outcomes: Evidence from the New York City bonus program. Journal of Labor Economics, 31(2), 409–420. doi:10.1086/668676
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gueorguieva, V., Accius, J., Apaza, C., Bennett, L., Brownley, C., Cronin, S., & Preechyanud, P. (2009). The program assessment rating tool and the government performance and results act: Evaluating conflicts and disconnections. The American Review of Public Administration, 39(3), 225–245. doi:10.1177/0275074008319218
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanushek, E. A., & Raymond, M. E. (2004). The effect of school accountability systems on the level and distribution of student achievement. Journal of the European Economic Association, 2(2–3), 406–415. doi:10.1162/154247604323068096
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanushek, E. A., & Raymond, M. E. (2005). Does school accountability lead to improved student performance? Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 24(2), 297–327. doi:10.2307/3326211
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hatry, H. P. (2006). Performance measurement: Getting results. Washington, DC: Urban Inst Press.
   Google Scholar
• Heckman, J. J., Heinrich, C. J., Courty, P., Marschke, G., & Smith, J. (2011). The performance of performance standards. Kalamazoo, MI: WE Upjohn Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Hefetz, A., & Warner, M. (2004). Privatization and its reverse: Explaining the dynamics of the government contracting process. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 14(2), 171–190. doi:10.1093/jopart/muh012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heinrich, C. J., & Choi, Y. (2007). Performance-based contracting in social welfare programs. The American Review of Public Administration, 37(4), 409–435. doi:10.1177/0275074006297553
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heinrich, C. J., & Marschke, G. (2010). Incentives and their dynamics in public sector performance management systems. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 29(1), 183–208. doi:10.1002/pam.20484
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hendrick, R. (2000). Comprehensive management and budgeting reform in local government: The case of milwaukee. Public Productivity and Management Review, 3(3), 312–337. doi:10.2307/3380722
   Google Scholar
• Heskett, J. L. (1999). NYPD new. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School.
   Google Scholar
• Hou, Y., Lunsford, R. S., Sides, K. C., & Jones, K. A. (2011). State performance‐based budgeting in boom and bust years: An analytical framework and survey of the states. Public Administration Review, 71(3), 370–388. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2011.02357.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hursh, D. (2007). Assessing no child left behind and the rise of neoliberal education policies. American Educational Research Journal, 44(3), 493–518. doi:10.3102/0002831207306764
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Im, T., & Lee, S. J. (2012). Does management performance impact citizen satisfaction? The American Review of Public Administration, 42(4), 419–436. doi:10.1177/0275074011408589
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacob, B., & Levitt, S. (2003). Rotten apples: An investigation of the prevalence and predictors of teacher cheating. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118(3), 843–878. doi:10.1162/00335530360698441
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• James, O. (2004). The UK core executive's use of public service agreements as a tool of governance. Public Administration, 82(2), 397–419. doi:10.1111/j.0033-3298.2004.00400.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jordan, M. M., & Hackbart, M. M. (1999). Performance budgeting and performance funding in the states: A states assessment. Public Budgeting Finance, 19, 68–88. doi:10.1046/j.0275-1100.1999.01157.x
   Google Scholar
• Joyce, P. G. (2011). The obama administration and pbb: building on the legacy of federal Performance‐informed budgeting? Public Administration Review, 71(3), 356–367. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2011.02355.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kelly, J. M., & Rivenbark, W. C. (2014). Performance budgeting for state and local government. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Klein, A., & Hoff, D. J. (2007). Unions assail teacher ideas in NCLB draft. Education Week, 27(4), 1–1,20.
   Google Scholar
• Lavertu, S., & Moynihan, D. P. (2013). Agency political ideology and reform implementation: Performance management in the bush administration. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 3(3), 521–549. doi:10.1093/jopart/mus026
   Google Scholar
• Linn, R. L., Baker, E. L., & Betebenner, D. W. (2002). Accountability systems: Implications of requirements of the no child left behind act of 2001. Educational Researcher, 31(6), 3–16. doi:10.3102/0013189X031006003
   Google Scholar
• Lu, Y. (2008). Managing the design of performance measures: The role of agencies. Public Performance and Management Review, 32(1), 7–24. doi:10.2753/PMR1530-9576320101
   Google Scholar
• Lu, E. Y., & Willoughby, K. (2015). Performance budgeting in American states: A framework of integrating performance with budgeting. International Journal of Public Administration, 38(8), 562–572. doi:10.1080/01900692.2014.949751
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lu, Y., Willoughby, K., & Arnett, S. (2009). Legislating results: Examining the legal foundations of PBB systems in the states. Public Performance and Management Review, 33(2), 266–287. doi:10.2753/PMR1530-9576330206
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Melkers, J., & Willoughby, K. (1998). The state of the states: Performance-based budgeting requirements in 47 out of 50. Public Administration Review, 58(1), 66–73. doi:10.2307/976891
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Melkers, J., & Willoughby, K. (2001). Budgeters' views of state performance‐budgeting systems: Distinctions across branches. Public Administration Review, 61(1), 54–64.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Melkers, J., & Willoughby, K. (2005). Models of performance‐measurement use in local governments: Understanding budgeting, communication, and lasting effects. Public Administration Review, 65(2), 180–190.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller, G. J., Robbins, D., & Keum, J. (2007). Incentives, certification, and targets in performance budgeting. Public Performance and Management Review, 30(4), 469–495. doi:10.2753/PMR1530-9576300401
   Google Scholar
• Moe, T. M. (1997). The positive theory of public bureaucracy. Chapter 21 In D. C. Mueller (Ed.), Perspectives on public choice (pp. 455–480). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Moynihan, D. P. (2006). Managing for results in state government: Evaluating a decade of reform. Public Administration Review, 66(1), 77–89. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00557
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moynihan, D. P. (2008). The dynamics of performance management: Constructing information and reform. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
   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. (2013). The new federal performance system: Implementing the GPRA modernization act. In Improving performance. Washington, DC: The IBM Center for the Business of Government.
   Google Scholar
• Moynihan, D. P., & Lavertu, S. (2012). Does involvement in performance management routines encourage performance information use? Evaluating GPRA and PART. Public Administration Review, 72(4), 592–602. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2011.02539.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moynihan, D. P., & Pandey, S. K. (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
• Mullen, P. R. (2006). Performance‐based budgeting: The contribution of the program assessment rating tool. Public Budgeting and Finance, 26(4), 79–88. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5850.2006.00863.x
   Google Scholar
• Osborne, D., & Gaebler, T. (1992). Reinventing government: How the entrepreneurial spirit is transforming the public sector. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• Osborne, D., & Hutchinson, P. (2009). The price of government: Getting the results we need in an age of permanent fiscal crisis. New York, NY: Basic Civitas Books.
   Google Scholar
• Podgursky, M. J., & Springer, M. G. (2007). Teacher performance pay: A review. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 26(4), 909–949. doi:10.2307/30162809
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Poister, T. H., Pasha, O. Q., & Edwards, L. H. (2013). Does performance management lead to better outcomes? Evidence from the U.S. public transit industry. Public Administration Review, 73(4), 625–636. doi:10.1111/puar.12076
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prendergast, C. (1999). The provision of incentives in firms. Journal of Economic Literature, 37(1), 7–63. doi:10.2307/2564725
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Radin, B. A. (1998). The Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA): Hydra-headed monster or flexible management tool? Public Administration Review, 58(4), 307–316. doi:10.2307/977560
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Radin, B. A. (2000). The government performance and results act and the tradition of federal management reform: Square pegs in round holes? Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10(1), 111–135.
   Google Scholar
• Radin, B. A. (2006). Challenging the performance movement: accountability, complexity, and democratic values. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Radin, B. A. (2008). The legacy of federal management change: PART repeats familiar problems. In F. S. Redburn, R. J. Shea, and T. F. Buss (Eds.), Performance management and budgeting: How governments can learn from experience (pp. 114–134). Armonk, NY: ME Sharpem.
   Google Scholar
• Rainey, H. G., & Bozeman, B. (2000). Comparing public and private organizations: Empirical research and the power of the a priori. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10(2), 447–470. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a024276
   Google Scholar
• Rubin, J. (2014). LAPD deployed ‘Ghost Cars' to meet staffing standards, report finds. Los Angeles, CA: Los Angeles Times, October 10, 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Schick, A. (1973). A death in the bureaucracy: The demise of federal PPB. Public Administration Review, 33(2), 146–156. doi:10.2307/974211
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, D. C., & Bratton, W. J. (2001). Performance management in New York City: Compstat and the revolution in police management. In D W. Forsythe (Ed), Quicker, better, cheaper: Managing performance in American government, (pp. 453–482). New York, NY: Rockefeller Institute Press
   Google Scholar
• Walker, R. M., Damanpour, F., & Devece, C. A. (2011). Management innovation and organizational performance: The mediating effect of performance management. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21(2), 367–386. doi:10.1093/jopart/muq043.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weibel, A., Rost, K., & Osterloh, M. (2010). Pay for performance in the public Sector—Benefits and (Hidden) costs. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 20(2), 387–412. doi:10.1093/jopart/mup009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wildavsky, A. B. (1966). The political economy of efficiency: Cost-Benefit analysis, systems analysis, and program budgeting. Public Administration Review, 26(4), 292–310. doi:10.2307/973301
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wildavsky, A. B. (1969). Rescuing policy analysis from PPBS. Public Administration Review, 29(2), 189–202. doi:10.2307/973700
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wildavsky, A. B. (1979). Speaking truth to power: The art and craft of policy analysis. London, UK: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Wildavsky, A. B., & Caiden, N. (2004). The new politics of the budgetary process. London, UK: Pearson/Longman New York.
   Google Scholar
• Williamson, O. (1985). The economic institutions of capitalism: Firms, markets, relational contracting. New York, NY: Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Williamson, O. (1988). The logic of economic organization. The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 4(1), 65–93. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.jleo.a036949
   Google Scholar
• Williamson, O. (1999). Public and private bureaucracies: A transaction cost economics perspective. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 15(1), 306–342.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Willis, J. J., Weisburd, D., & Mastrofski, S. D. (2003). Compstat in practice: An In-depth analysis of three cities. Washington, DC: Police Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Wilson, J. Q. (1989). Bureaucracy: What governments do and why they do it. New York, NY: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Zimring, F. E. (2011). The city that became safe: New York's lessons for urban crime and its control. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar