Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Presidential address: ?Complexifying? performance oversight in America's governments

2005; Wiley; Volume: 24; Issue: 2 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1002/pam.20085

1520-6688

Richard P. Nathan,

Local Government Finance and Decentralization

Journal of Policy Analysis and ManagementVolume 24, Issue 2 p. 207-215 EditorialFull Access Presidential address: “Complexifying” performance oversight in America's governments Richard P. Nathan, Richard P. Nathan Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government, State University of New YorkSearch for more papers by this author Richard P. Nathan, Richard P. Nathan Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government, State University of New YorkSearch for more papers by this author First published: 04 March 2005 https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.20085Citations: 11AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onEmailFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat REFERENCES Baker, G., Gibbons, R., & Murphy, K.J. (1994). Subjective performance measures in optimal incentive contracts. The Quarterly Journal of Economic, 109(4) November, 1125–1156. Blalock, A.B., & Barnow, B.S. (2001). Is the new obsession with performance management masking the truth about social programs? In D.W. Forsythe (Ed.), Quicker better cheaper: Managing performance in American government. Albany, NY: The Rockefeller Institute Press, pp. 487–519. Cook, R.F., Adams, C.R., & Rawlins, V.L. (1985). Public service employment: The experience of a decade. Kalamazoo, MI: W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research. Derthick, M. (2001). Keeping the compound republic: Essays on American federalism. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution Press. Epstein, A.M., Lee, T.H., & Hamel, M.B. (2004). Paying physicians for high-quality care. The New England Journal of Medicine, 350(4), 406–410. Gais, T.L., Nathan, Richard P., Lurie, Irene, & Kaplan, T. (2001). Implementation of the Personal Responsibility Act of 1996. In The World of Welfare, R. Blank and R. Haskins (Eds.), Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press. Hatry, H.P. (1997). Comparative performance measurement: FY 1996 data report (adapted). Washington, D.C.: International City/County Management Association. Hatry, H.P. (2001). What types of performance information should be tracked. In D.W. Forsythe (Ed.), Quicker better cheaper: Managing performance in American government, Albany, NY: The Rockefeller Institute Press. Heinrich, C.J. (2002). Outcome-based performance management in the public sector: implications for government accountability and effectiveness. Public Administration Review, 62(6), 712–725. Nathan, R.P. (1983). The administrative presidency. New York, NY: Macmillan. Nathan, R.P. (2000). Social science in government: The role of policy research. Albany, NY: The Rockefeller Institute Press (reprinted). Nathan, R.P., & Gais, T.L. (1999). Implementing the Personal Responsibility Act of 1996: A first look. Albany, NY: The Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government. 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. Rodriguez, J.F. (2004). The arrival of performance budgeting. The business of government, pp. 56–61 (summer). Wilson, J.Q. (2000). Bureaucracy. New York, NY: Basic Books. Citing Literature Volume24, Issue2Spring 2005Pages 207-215 ReferencesRelatedInformation