This article compares and contrasts the reinvention efforts at the national and state levels of government. Findings include striking similarities in the two reinvention reports while the tone or manner of presenting is different. For example, while they both advocate a new role for the public manager, the Gore report is more entrepreneurial and receptive to privatization than the Winter Commission. The use of commissions for reinvention efforts is discussed, followed by a detailed account of the management components that make up the reinvention efforts at the state level and how these components are linked and aligned. Illustrations are provided from findings in six states' managing for results systems and their linking efforts.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AffholterDennis F. (1994). "Outcome Monitoring," in WholeyJoseph, HatryHarry, and NewcomerKathryn (eds.). Handbook of Practical Program Evaluation.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
2.
AnsoffH. Igor (1979). Strategic Management. New York: Wiley and Sons.
3.
AristiguetaMaria P. (1999). Managing for Results in State Government.Westport, CT: Quorum Books.
4.
BauerRaymond A.Social Indicators.Cambridge: MIT Press.
5.
BavonAlousius (1995). "Innovations in Performance Measurement Systems: A Comparative Perspective." International Journal of Public Administration18 (2 and 3):491–519.
6.
BerryJeffrey M., KentE. Portney, and ThomsonKen (1993). The Rebirth of Urban Democracy.Washington D.C.Brookings Institution.
7.
BosnerE.EugeneB. McGegorJr., and ClintonO. OsterJr. (1996). Policy Choices and Public Action.Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
8.
BowmanAn O.M. and RichardC. Kearney (1995). The Resurgence of the States.Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
9.
BrysonJohn M. (1995). Strategic Planning for Public and Nonprofit Organizations.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
10.
ButlerPaul (1988). "For Successful Strategic Change: Blend OD Practices with Strategic Management." Organizational Dynamics (Winter):42–55.
11.
ChandlerAlfred (1962). Strategy and Structure: Chapters in the History of the Industrial Enterprise.Cambridge: MIT Press.
12.
ChapinLinda W. and RobertB. Denhardt (1995). "Putting Citizens First in Orange County, Florida." National Civic Review84(3)210–217.
13.
CiglerBeverly A. (1995). "County Government in the 1990a." State and Local Government Review27 (1):55–70.
14.
ConantJames K. (1988). "In the Shadow of Wilson and Brownlow: Executive Branch Reorganization in the States." Public Administration Review48:892–902.
15.
DruckerPeter F. (1974). Management: Tasks, Responsibilities, Practices.New York: Harper and Row.
16.
DruckerPeter F. (1998). The New Realities: In Government and Politics, in Economics and Business, in Society and World View.New York: Harper and Row.
17.
EhenhaltAlan (1994). "Performance Budgeting, Thy Name Is. ." Governing8 (November):9.
18.
EpsteinPaul D. (1992). "Measuring the Performance of Public Services," in HolzerMark (ed). Public Productivity Handbook.New York: Marcel Dekker.
19.
FountainJames R. (1997). "Are State and Local Governments Using Performance Measures?" Public Administration Times20 (January): PM-2.
20.
FredericksonH. George (1992). "Painting Bull's-Eyes Around Bullet Holes." Governing (October): 13.
21.
GluckFredeerick W., StephenF. Kaufman, and StevenA. Walleck (1980). "Strategic Management for Competitive Advantage." Harvard Business Review (July -August): 154–161.
22.
GoreAl (1993). From Red Tape to Results: Creating a Government that Works Better and Costs Less.National Performance Review. New York: Times Books.
23.
Government Accounting Standards Board (1993). "Proposed Statement on Concepts Related to Service Efforts and Accomplishment Reporting." Exposure Draft, September.
24.
Government Performance and Results Act, P.L. 103-62 [S20] 107 Statute 285, August 3, 1993.
25.
GreinerJohn M. (1996). "Positioning Performance Measurement for the Twenty-First Century," in HalachmiArie and BouckaertGeert (eds). Organizational Performance and Measurement in the Public Sector.Westport, CT: Quorum Books.
26.
GrizzleGloria (1981). "A Manager's Guide to the Meaning and Uses of Performance Measurement." American Review of Public Administration15:16–28.
27.
HatryHarry P. and JohnJ. Kirlin (1994). "An Assessment of the Oregon Benchmarks: A Report to the Oregon Progress Board." Unpublished document.
28.
IngrahamPatricia W., BarbaraS. Romzek, . (1994). New Paradigms for Government: Issues for the Changing Public Service.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
29.
InnesJudith Eleanor (1990). Knowledge and Public Policy: The Search for Meaningful Indicators.New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
30.
LightPaul (1997). The Tide of Reform.New Haven: Yale University Press.
31.
JreisatJamil and FrankP. Sherwood (1994). "Reinventing Government in Florida." Florida Center for Public Management Monograph Series.
32.
KearnsKevin P. (1996). Managing for Accountability: Preserving the Public Trust in Public and Nonprofit Organizations.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
33.
KettlDonald F. (1994). Reinventing Government? Appraising the National Performance Review.Washington D.C.:Brookings Institution.
34.
KirlinJohn J. (1995). "What Government Must Do Well: Creating Value for Society." Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory6 (January): 161–185.
35.
LarsonJohn R. and CallahanC. (1990). "Performance Monitoring: How It Affects Work Productivity." Journal of Applies Psychology75:530–538.
36.
ManesSpecter (1971). "Involving Clients and the Public in Federal Administration through Advisory Committees," in DavidS. Brown (ed). Federal Contributions to Management. New York: Praeger.
37.
MarchJames G. and JohnP. Olson (1983). "Organizing Political Life: What Administrative Reorganization Tells Us about Government." American Political Science Review77:281 -293.
38.
MintzbergH (1994a), "The Fall and Rise of Strategic Planning." Harvard Business Review72(1)107–114.
39.
MintzbergH (1994b). The Rise and Fall of Strategic Planning.New York: Free Press.
40.
MoeRonald C. (1994). "The Reinventing Government Exercise: Misinterpreting the Problem, Misjudging the Consequences." Public Administration Review54(2)194–204.
41.
NadlerDavid A. and TushmanMichael (1989). "Organizational Frame Bending: Principles for Managing Reorientation." Academy of Management Executive3(2)194:204.
42.
National Academy Public Administration (1994). Toward Useful Performance Measurement: Lessons Learned from Initial Performance Plans Prepared under the Government Performance and Results Act. (November): Author.
43.
National Association of State Budget Officers (1993). Restructuring and Innovations in State Government.Washington, DC: (July): Author.
44.
NewlandChester A. (1983-84). "Federal Government Management Trends." Bureaucrat12 (4) (Winter):3–13.
45.
PaollineliMarcie Collin (1996). "Toward a Theory of Large-Scale Organizational Change: Administrative Reform in the State of Missouri." DPA dissertation, University of Southern California.
46.
PetersB. Guy and DonaldJ. Savoie (1994). "Civil Service Reform: Misdiagnosing the Patient." Public Administration Review54:418–425.
47.
RileyClarence E. and HerbertA. Simon (1943). Measuring Municipal Activities: A Survey of Suggested Criteria for Appraising Administration.Chicago"International City Managers Association.
48.
RodgersRobert and JohnH. Hunter (1992). "A Foundation of Good Management Practice in Government: Managing by Objectives." Public Administration Review52(l):27–39.
49.
SchickAlan (1990). "Budgeting for Results: Recent Developments in Five Industrialized Countries." Public Administration Review50 (1) (January-February): 26–34.
50.
ThompsonFrank J. (1993). "National Commission on the State and Local Public Service," in Hard Truths/Tough Choices: An Agenda for State and Local Reform.New York: Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government.
51.
TichyNoel M. (1983). Managing Strategic Change: Technical, Political, and Cultural Dynamics.New York: John Wiley and Sons.
52.
United States Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget (1973). "Social Indicators." Washington, D.C.:Government Printing Office.
53.
United States General Accounting Office (1994). Managing for Results: State Experiences Provide Insights for Federal Management Reforms. (GAO/GGD-95-22). Washington, D.C.:Government Printing Office.
54.
United States General Accounting Office (1996). Effectively Implementing the Government Performance and Results Act. (GAO/GGD-96-118) Washington, D.C.:Government Printing Office.
55.
WholeyJoseph S. (1983). Evaluation and Effective Public Management.Boston: Little, Brown.
56.
WholeyJoseph S. and HarryHarry (1992). "The Case for Performance Monitoring." Public Administration Review52(6)604–610.
