On the Road to Improved Performance

References

• Ammons, D. (2002). Performance measurement and managerial thinking. Public Performance and Management Review, 25(4), 344-347.
   Google Scholar
• Barrett, K., & Greene, R. (2001). Grading the states 2001: A management report card. Governing Magazine. Available at www.governing.com/gpp/2001/gp1intro.htm
   Google Scholar
• Belsley, D.A., Kuh, E., & Welsch, R.E. (2004). Regression diagnostics: Identifying influential data and sources of collinearity. New York: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Berman, E. (1998). Productivity in public and nonprofit organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA. Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Berman, E. (2002). How useful is performance measurement? Public Performance and Management Review, 25(4), 348-351.
   Google Scholar
• Berman, E., & Wang, X.-H. (2000). Performance measurement in U.S. counties. Public Administration Review, 60(5), 409-420.
   Google Scholar
• Broom, C.A., & McGuire, L.A. (1995). Performance-based government models: Building a track record. Public Budgeting and Finance, 15(4), 3-17.
   Google Scholar
• Carnevale, A.P., & Carnevale, D.G. (1993). Public administration and the evolving world of work. Public Productivity and Management Review, 17(1), 1-14.
   Google Scholar
• Chackerian, R., & Mavima, P. (2001). Comprehensive administration reform implementation: Moving beyond single issue implementation research. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 11(3), 353-377.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, D. (1998). Towards a knowledge context: Report on the First Annual U.C. Berkeley Forum on Knowledge and the Firm. California Management Review, 40(3), 22-39.
   Google Scholar
• DuPont-Morales, M.A., & Harris, J.E. (1994). Strengthening accountability: Incorporating strategic planning and performance measurement into budgeting. Public Productivity and Management Review, 17(3), 231-340.
   Google Scholar
• Feller, I. (2002). Performance measurement redux. American Journal of Evaluation, 23(4), 435-452.
   Google Scholar
• Government Accounting Standards Board. (2000). State and local government case studies: The use and the effects of using performance measures for budgeting, management, and reporting. Available at www.seagov.org/sea_gasb_project/local_studies.shtml
   Google Scholar
• Graber, D.A. (1992). Public sector communication: How organizations manage information. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly.
   Google Scholar
• Grizzle, G.A. (2002). Implementing performance-based budgeting: A systems-dynamics perspective. Public Administration Review, 62(1), 51-62.
   Google Scholar
• Grizzle, G.A., & Pettijohn, C.D. (2002). Implementing performance-based program budgeting: A system-dynamics perspective. Public Administration Review, 62(1), 51-62.
   Google Scholar
• Guba, E.G., & Lincoln, Y. (1981). Effective evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Hatry, H. (1999). Performance measurement: Getting results. Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hennessey, J.T. (1998)."Reinventing" government: Does leadership make a difference? Public Administration Review, 58(6), 522-532.
   Google Scholar
• Ingraham, P. (2005). Performance: Promises to keep and miles to go. The Donald Stone Lecture. Public Administration Review, 65(4), 390-395.
   Google Scholar
• Ingraham, P.W., & Moynihan, D.P. (2001). Beyond measurement: Managing for results in state government. In D.W. Forsythe (Ed.), Quicker, better, cheaper: Managing performance in American government (pp. 309-334). Albany, NY: Rockefeller Institute Press.
   Google Scholar
• International City/County Management Association. (2002). The municipal yearbook. Washington, DC.
   Google Scholar
• Jensen, M.C., & Meckling, W.H. (1992). Specific and general knowledge, and organizational structure. In L. Werin & H. Wijkander (Eds.), Contract economics (pp. 251-274). Oxford: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Joyce, P.G. (1993). Using performance measures for federal budgeting: Proposals and prospects. Public Budgeting and Finance, 13(4), 3-17.
   Google Scholar
• Joyce, P.G. (1997). Using performance measures for budgeting: A new beat, or is it the same old tune? In K. Newcomer (Ed.), Using performance measurement to improve public and nonprofit programs (pp. 45-61). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Joyce, P.G., & Tompkins, S.S. (2002). Using performance information for budgeting: Clarifying the framework and investigating recent state experience. In K. Newcomer et al. (Ed.), Meeting the challenge of performance oriented government (pp. 61-96). Washington, DC: American Society for Public Administration.
   Google Scholar
• Kettl, D.F. (1994). Reinventing government: Appraising the National Performance Review. Washington DC: Brookings Institution.
   Google Scholar
• Knock, N., & McQueen, R. (1998). Knowledge and information communication within organizations: An analysis of core, support and improvement process. Knowledge and Process Management, 5(1), 29-40.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, R.D., & Burns, R.C. (2000). Performance measurement in state budgeting: Advancement and backsliding from 1990 to 1995. Public Budgeting and Finance, 20(1), 38-54.
   Google Scholar
• Melkers, J.E., & Willoughby, K.G. (1998). The state of the states: Performance-based budgeting in 47 out of 50. Public Administration Review, 58(1), 66-73.
   Google Scholar
• Melkers, J.E., & Willoughby, K.G. (2001). Budgeters' views of state performance budgeting systems: Distinctions across branches. Public Administration Review, 61(1), 54-64.
   Google Scholar
• Patton, M.Q. (1986). Utilization focused evaluation. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Patton, M.Q., Grimes, P.S., Guthrie, K.W., et al. (1977). In search of impact: An analysis of the utilization of federal health evaluation research. In C.H. Weiss (Ed.), Using social research in policy making (pp. 141-164). Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
   Google Scholar
• Pettijohn, C.D., & Grizzle, G.A. (1997). Structural budget reform: Does it affect budget deliberations? Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting and Financial Management, 9(1), 26-45.
   Google Scholar
• Poister, T.H., & Streib, G. (1999). Performance measurement in municipal government: Assessing the state of the practice. Public Administration Review, 59(4), 325-335.
   Google Scholar
• Ridgway, V.F. (1959). Dysfunctional consequences of performance measurement. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1(2), 240-247.
   Google Scholar
• Thompson, P.A., Brown, R.D., & Furgason, J. (1981). Jargon and data do make a difference: The impact of report styles on lay and professional evaluation audiences. Evaluation Review, 5(2), 269-279.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2005). Performance budgeting: States' experiences can inform federal efforts. Report no. GAO-05-215. Washington, DC.
   Google Scholar
• Willoughby, K.G., & Melkers, J. (2000). Implementing PBB: Conflicting views of success. Public Budgeting and Finance, 20(1), 105-120.
   Google Scholar
• Zack, M.H. (1999). Managing codified knowledge. Sloan Management Review, 40(4), 45-57.
   Google Scholar