Internal Performance-Based Steering in Public Sector Organizations: Examining the Effect of Organizational Autonomy and External Result Control

Wynen, Jan; Verhoest, Koen

doi:10.1080/15309576.2015.1137769

Cited by 31 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…With awareness of the above limitations, our study nonetheless contributes to the understanding of the bureaucratic attributes-innovative activity relationship. Large-scale data collection on comparative bureaucratic behavior is still in its infancy, and there is a shortage of quantitative comparative research (Jeannot, Van de Walle, & Hammerschmid, 2018;Van de Walle, Hammerschmid, Oprisor, & Stimac, 2016;Wynen & Verhoest, 2016). Future study should undertake the above tasks as data become available.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some consider bureaucratic control and its particular characteristics as an obstacle to innovation. Such criticisms mainly come from the New Public Management (NPM) and National Performance Review (NPR) perspectives (Damanpour, 1996;Dougherty & Corse, 1995;Osborne & Gaebler, 1992;Osborne & Plastrik, 1997;Peters, 2010;Wynen & Verhoest, 2016). However, results of recent empirical studies show that Weber's model of public bureaucracy (i.e., politically neutral decision making and impartial exercise of public authority) plays a key role in various national level indicators such as levels of corruption, socioeconomic development, entrepreneurship, scientific productivity, and policy implementation, which may also be associated with levels of innovative activity (e.g., Aucoin, 2012;Bor€ ang, Nistotskaya, & Xezonakis, 2017;Charron, Dahlstr€ om, & Lapuente, 2016;Cornell, 2014;Cornell & Grimes, 2015;Dahlstr€ om & Lapuente, 2017;Evans & Rauch, 1999; Fern andez-Carro & Lapuente-Gin e, 2016; Lodge & Gill, 2011;Nistotskaya & Cingolani, 2016;Rauch & Evans, 2000;Rothstein & Teorell, 2008).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Association Between Administrative Characteristics and National Level Innovative Activity: Findings from a Cross-National Study

Suzuki

Demircioglu

2018

Public Performance & Management Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines an association between two important and historical administrative characteristics of civil service systems (i.e., professional and impartial public administration) and national level innovation outputs. Scholars have examined the influence of macrolevel factors, such as the general level of human capital, culture, and social capital, on national rates of innovative activity. However, we still have limited understanding of the relationship between the administrative characteristics of government and national levels of innovative activity in a cross-national setting. This article hypothesizes that countries with highly professional and impartial public administration tend to have higher national level innovation outputs (i.e., knowledge and technology, creative outputs). From utilizing cross-national data from the Quality of Government Institute Expert Survey and Global Innovation Index from over 100 economies, findings show that national levels of innovation outputs are significantly higher in countries that have higher levels of professional and impartial public administration. The results suggest the importance of professional and impartial administration for national level innovative activity.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Association Between Administrative Characteristics and National Level Innovative Activity: Findings from a Cross-National Study

Suzuki

Demircioglu

2018

Public Performance & Management Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These findings show certain limitations to the assumptions that underpinned the disaggregation of public services (Overman, 2016). The conclusion implies that effects of structural disaggregation are more complex than sometimes assumed (Wynen & Verhoest, 2016). These findings underline that the relationship between organization and employee is a multilayered exchange relationship.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 78%

How Creating Semiautonomous Agencies Affects Staff Satisfaction

Overman

2019

Public Performance & Management Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Structural reforms such as the creation of autonomous agencies are a widely heralded solution for a multitude of problems in the public sector. These reforms have effects on public employees. This article shows how the structural disaggregation of ministries into autonomous agencies affects staff satisfaction with the organization. The article discusses three cases, where Dutch public organizations were either disaggregated from a ministry or reaggregated to the ministry. These structural reforms constitute a quasiexperimental setting where effects on agency staff and parent ministry staff are compared. In one case, creating the agency led to a decrease in staff satisfaction with the organization as compared to the staff that remained within the ministry. A second case showed that these negative effects linger and can last for more than eight years. An inverse organizational change-reaggregation-caused inverse effects: increasing satisfaction with the organization.

show abstract

“…The stimulus to overcome rigid managerial practices creates a favorable institutional setting to implement new practices, techniques and products (Dunleavy et al, 2006;Wynen et al, 2014). Higher-level managers will transmit the goals and priorities set by the principal to lower-level managers, and in order to monitor lower level organizational units, internal performance control is needed (Wynen and Verhoest, 2016). An increase in efficiency can be expected because the monolithic structure of a public organization will atomize into structures that are led by autonomous managers, free to deregulate the use of inputs and stimulated to maximize outputs.…”

Section: Conceptual Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Autonomy, Performance And Efficiency: An Empirical Analysis Of Russian Universities 2014-2018

Agasisti

Шибанова

2020

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper studies the relationship between university institutional autonomy (both formal and informal) and their performance and efficiency using multi-stage empirical methodology. First, we measure an "autonomy-in-use" index, and then we employ Data Envelopment Analysis in order to evaluate institutional efficiency. Lastly, we use a panel fixed effect regression and an instrumental variable approach to provide robust evidence for the relationship between institutional autonomy, performance and efficiency. We find that formal status of autonomy does not predict higher publication activity or efficiency. However, the findings also reveal that informal autonomy is positively associated with efficiency scores, and advanced practices in staff management can contribute to increases in publication activity and overall institutional efficiency.

show abstract

Internal Performance-Based Steering in Public Sector Organizations: Examining the Effect of Organizational Autonomy and External Result Control

Cited by 31 publications

References 46 publications

The Association Between Administrative Characteristics and National Level Innovative Activity: Findings from a Cross-National Study

The Association Between Administrative Characteristics and National Level Innovative Activity: Findings from a Cross-National Study

How Creating Semiautonomous Agencies Affects Staff Satisfaction

Autonomy, Performance And Efficiency: An Empirical Analysis Of Russian Universities 2014-2018

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About