Lost in comparison: a program theory analysis of performance measurement in social work

References

• Agevall Gross, L., V. Denvall, C. Kjellgren, and M. Skillmark. 2015. “Brottsoffer I Indikatorland: Öppna Jämförelser Inom Socialtjänstens Brottsofferstödjande Arbete.” Socialvetenskaplig Tidskrift 22: 341–358.
   Google Scholar
• Arnaboldi, M., I. Lapsley, and I. Steccolini. 2015. “Performance Management in the Public Sector: The Ultimate Challenge.” Financial Accountability & Management 31 (1): 1–22. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/faam.2015.31.issue-1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Balle Hansen, M. 2016. “Performance Managemant Og Evaluering.” In Evaluering Af Offentlig Politik Og Administration, edited by T. Bredgard, 115–143. Copenhagen: Hans Reitzels Forlag.
   Google Scholar
• Balle Hansen, M., and E. Vedung. 2010. “Theory-based Stakeholder Evaluation.” American Journal of Evaluation 31 (3): 295–313. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214010366174.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berwick, D., and D. M. Fox. 2016. ““Evaluating the Quality of Medical care”: Donabedian’s Classic Article 50 Years Later.” The Milbank Quarterly 94 (2): 237–241. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0009.12189.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bevan, G., and C. Hood. 2006. “Whats´s Measured Is What Matters: Targets and Gaming in the English Public Helath Care System.” Public Administration 84 (3): 517–538. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2006.00600.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blomgren, M., and C. Waks. 2011. “Öppna jämförelser inom hälso-och sjukvården-en utmaning mot den professionella byråkratin? [Open Comparisons within Health Care – A Challenge to Professional bureaucracy?].” Arbetsmarknad & Arbetsliv 17 (4): 95–108.
   Google Scholar
• Brunsson, N. 2006. Mechanisms of Hope: Maintaining the Dream of the Rational Organization. Malmö: Liber and Copenhagen Business School Pr.
   Google Scholar
• Chen, H. T. 1990. Theory-driven Evaluations. New York: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Clarkson, P. 2010. “Performance Measurement in Adult Social Care: Looking Backwards and Forwards.” British Journal of Social Work 40 (1): 170–187. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcn096.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dahler-Larsen, P. 2011. The Evaluation Society. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• De Bruijn, H. 2007. Managing Performance in the Public Sector. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• DiMaggio, P. J., and W. W. Powell. 1983. “The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizatinal Fields.” American Sociological Review 48 (2): 147–160. doi:https://doi.org/10.2307/2095101.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Donabedian, A. 1966. “Evaluating the Quality of Medical Care.” The Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly 44 (3): 166–206. doi:https://doi.org/10.2307/3348969.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Donaldson, S. I. 2007. Program Theory-driven Evaluation Science: Strategies and Applications. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Erlingsdottir, G. 1995. Förförande idéer–kvalitetssäkring i hälso-och sjukvården [Seductive Ideas – Quality-assurance within Health care]. Lund: Lund university.
   Google Scholar
• Evetts, J. 2009. “New Professionalism and New Public Management: Changes, Continuities and Consequences.” Comparative Sociology 8 (2): 247–266. doi:https://doi.org/10.1163/156913309X421655.
   Google Scholar
• Groth Andersen, S., and V. Denvall. 2017. “Data Recording in Performance Managemant – Trouble with the Logics.” American Journal of Evaluation 38 (2): 190–204. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214016681510.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanberger, A., and L. Lindgren. 2018. “Evaluation Systems in Local Eldercare Governance.” Journal of Social Work 19: 1–20.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hasselbladh, H., E. Bejerot, and R. Å. Gustafsson. 2008. Bortom New Public Management-Institutionell transformation i svensk sjukvård [Beyond New Public Management – Institutional Transformation within Swedish Health care]. Lund: Academia Adacta.
   Google Scholar
• Hertting, N., and E. Vedung. 2009. Den utvärderingstäta politiken: Styrning och utvärdering i svensk storstadspolitik [The Evaluation Tight Politics – Governance and Evaluation in the Swedish Metropolitan politics]. Lund: Studentlitteratur.
   Google Scholar
• Hood, C. 2012. “Public Management by Numbers as a Performance-Enhancing Drug: Two Hypotheses.” Public Administration Review 72: S85–S92. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2012.02634.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Høybye-Mortensen, M. 2015. “Decision-making Tools and Their Influence on Caseworkers’ Room for Discretion.” British Journal of Social Work 45: 600–615. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bct144.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Høybye-Mortensen, M. 2016. “Performance Information in Human Service Organizations: Quality and Usefulness.” Human Service Organizations: Management, Leadership & Governance 40 (5): 486–499.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hunter, D., and S. Nielsen. 2013. “Performance Management and Evaluation: Exploring Complementarities.” New Directions for Evaluation, no. 137: 7–17. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.20042.
   Google Scholar
• Johansson, V., and L. Lindgren. 2013. Uppdrag offentlig granskning [The Mission of Public audit]. Lund: Studentlitteratur.
   Google Scholar
• Lindgren, L. 2014. Nya utvärderingsmonstret. Om kvalitetsmätning i den offentliga sektorn [The New Evaluation Monster. About Quality Measurement in the Public sector]. Lund: Studentlitteratur.
   Google Scholar
• Lindgren, L., M. Ottosson, and O. Salas. 2012. Öppna Jämförelser. Ett styrmedel i tiden eller “Hur kunde det bli så här?” [Open Comparisons. Governance of Our Time or “How Could It End up like this?”]. Göteborg: FoU i Väst.
   Google Scholar
• Perrow, C. 1986. Complex Organizations: A Criticial Essay. Third ed. New York: Random House.
   Google Scholar
• Pollitt, C. 2006. “Performance Management in Practice: A Comparative Study of Executive Agencies.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 16 (1): 25–44. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mui045.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pollitt, C. 2013. “The Logics of Performance Management.” Evaluation 19 (4): 346–363. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389013505040.
   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. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Power, M. 1999. The Audit Society: Rituals of Verification. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.
   Google Scholar
• Regeringskansliet. 2014. Öppna jämförelser inom hälso- Och sjukvården – Handlingsplan för 2014–2015 [Open Comparisons in Health Care - Action Plan during 2014–2015]. Stockholm: Regeringskansliet.
   Google Scholar
• Rogers, P. J., and C. H. Weiss. 2007. “Theory-based Evaluation: Reflections Ten Years On: Theory-based Evaluation: Past, Present, and Future.” New Directions for Evaluation 2007 (114): 63–81. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.225.
   Google Scholar
• Sauder, M., and W. N. Espeland. 2009. “The Discipline of Rankings: Tight Coupling and Organizational Change.” American Sociological Review 74 (1): 63–82. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240907400104.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shaw, I., M. Bell, I. Sinclair, P. Sloper, W. Mitchell, P. Dyson, and J. Rafferty. 2009. “An Exemplary Scheme? an Evaluation of the Integrated Children’s System.” British Journal of Social Work 39 (4): 613–626. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcp040.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shore, C., and S. Wright. 2015. “Governing by Numbers: Audit Culture, Rankings and the New World Order.” Social Anthropology 23 (1): 22–28. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/1469-8676.12098.
   Google Scholar
• Skillmark, M., L. Agevall Gross, C. Kjellgren, and V. Denvall. 2019. “The Pursuit of Standardization in Domestic Violence Social Work: A Multiple Case Study of How the Idea of Using Risk Assessment Tools Is Manifested and Processed in the Swedish Social Services.” Qualitative Social Work: Research and Practice18 (3), 458–474. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1473325017739461.
   Google Scholar
• Socialdepartementet. 2015. Öppna jämförelser inom socialtjänsten och hemsjukvården. Handlingsplan 2015–2018 [Open Comparisons within Social Service and Home Care. Action Plan 2015–2018]. Stockholm: Socialdepartemenet.
   Google Scholar
• Socialstyrelsen. 2007. Modell för utveckling av kvalitetsindikatorer i socialtjänsten [A Model for Developing Quality-indicators within the Social services]. Stockholm: Socialstyrelsen.
   Google Scholar
• Socialstyrelsen. 2010. Social rapport [Social Report]. Stockholm: Socialstyrelsen.
   Google Scholar
• Socialstyrelsen. 2014. Öppna jämförelser 2014. Stöd till brottsoffer. Nationella resultat, metod och indikatorer [Open Comparisons 2014. Support to Crime Victims. National Results, Methods and indicators]. Stockholm: Socialstyrelsen.
   Google Scholar
• Socialstyrelsen. 2016. Öppna jämförelser 2016. Våld i nära relationer. Guide för att tolka resultaten [Open Comparisons 2016. Domestic Violence. Guide to Interpret the results]. Stockholm: Socialstyrelsen.
   Google Scholar
• SOU. 2015. Nationell strategi mot mäns våld mot kvinnor och hedersrelaterat våld och förtryck [The National Strategy against Domestic Violence and Honour-related Violence and oppression], 55. Vol. SOU 2015. Stockholm: Fritzes.
   Google Scholar
• Van Dooren, W., C. De Caluwe, and Z. Lonti. 2012. “How to Measure Public Administration Performance: A Conceptual Model with Applications for Budgeting, Human Resources Management, and Open Government.” Public Performance & Management Review 35 (3): 489–508. doi:https://doi.org/10.2753/PMR1530-9576350306.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vårdanalys. 2012. Grönt ljus för Öppna jämförelser? Vårdanalys utvärdering av öppna jämförelser inom hälso- och sjukvården. Rapport 2012:4 [Green Light for Open Comparisons? Vårdanalys Evaluation of Open Comparisons within the Health Care. Report 2012:4]. Stockholm: Myndigheten för Vårdanalys.
   Google Scholar
• Vedung, E. 2011. “Spridning, användning och implementering av utvärdering [Diffusion, Use and Implementation of evaluation].” In Utvärdering i socialt arbete: Utgångspunkter, modeller och användning [Evaluation in Social Wirk; Starting-points, Models and use], edited by B. Blom, L. Nygren, and S. Morén, 285–299. Stockholm: Natur & kultur.
   Google Scholar
• Wandersman, A., P. Imm, M. Chinman, and S. Kaftarian. 2000. “Getting to Outcomes: A Results-based Approach to Accountability.” Evaluation and Program Planning 23: 389–395. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0149-7189(00)00028-8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weiss, C. 1997. “How Can Theory-based Evaluation Make Greater Headway?” Evaluation Review 21 (4): 501–524. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0193841X9702100405.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar