References
- 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.
- Coe, C. (1999). Local government benchmarking: Lessons from two major multigovernment efforts. Public Administration Review, 59(2), 110-123.
- Collins, J. (2001). Good to great. New York: HarperCollins.
- de Lancer Julnes, P., & Holzer, M. (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.
- Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB). (2003). Reporting performance information: Suggested criteria for effective communication. Norwalk, CT.
- Hatry, H. P. (1980). Performance measurement principles and techniques: An overview for local government. Public Productivity Review, 4(4), 312-339.
- Kelly, J. M., & Swindell, D. (2002). A multiple-indicator approach to municipal service evaluation: Correlating performance measurement and citizen satisfaction across jurisdictions. Public Administration Review, 62(5), 610-621.
- Roenigk, D. J. (2009). Final report on city services for fiscal year 2007-2008. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina School of Government.
- Stipak, B. (1979). Citizen satisfaction with urban services: Potential misuse as a performance indicator. Public Administration Review, 39(1), 46-52.
- Vogt, A. J., & Few, P. F. (1999). Performance and cost data: Phase III city services. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina School of Government.
- Watson, D. J., Juster, R. J., & Johnson, G. W. (1991). Institutionalized use of citizen surveys in the budgetary and policy-making processes: A small city case study. Public Administration Review, 51(3), 232-239.
- Webb, K., & Hatry, H. P. (1973). Obtaining citizen feedback: The application of citizen surveys in local governments. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.