Public management reform and organizational performance: An empirical assessment of the U.K. Labour government's public service improvement strategy

Abstract

We present the first empirical assessment of the U.K. Labour government's program of public management reform. This reform program is based on rational planning, devolution and delegation, flexibility and incentives, and enhanced choice. Measures of these variables are tested against external and internal indicators of organizational performance. The setting for the study is upper tier English local governments, and data are drawn from a multiple informant survey of 117 authorities. The statistical results indicate that planning, organizational flexibility, and user choice are associated with higher performance. Conclusions are drawn for the theory and practice of public management reform. © 2006 by the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management

Implementation and effects of user participation in playground management: a comparative study of two Swedish municipalities

“…NPM consists of a cluster of ideas borrowed from the private sector on how to manage organisations (Power, 1997). One of the most common ideas is to view citizens and other users of local government services as customers (Maddock, 2002;Walker and Boyne, 2006;Wichowsky and Moynihan, 2008). One effect of this change is decentralisation of responsibility in the local government.…”

State Experiences in the Application of Performance Management in the Context of Differences between Administrative Cultures

“…Labour Party prepared a huge reform package and this package created an affect of big bang for better performance in the process of reformation. While no theory was chosen in order to improve the performance in the public sector throughout this process, there have been various and different types of reform strategies (Walker and Boyne, 2006). In order to make the performance management function better, in 1997, the program of "The Best Value" was put forward.…”

“…Four levels (very good, good, enough, not enough) which were defined by the central government and calculated by private cooperation are chosen as the performance indicators (Kuhlmann, 2010). External decisions of local governments" main service performance are affected from the CPA results (Walker and Boyne, 2006). Moreover, main service performance depends on approximately a hundred different indicators of The Best Value (Walker et al, 2011).…”

“…Main service performance results include six dimensions of performance, which are quantity of outputs, quality to outputs, effectiveness, legal sufficiency, reserve of money, and customer satisfaction. As a result of the application in which 1 to 4 points are given for each of every services by the Audit Commission, the least points that could be gathered comes out as 15 whereas the most comes out as 60 (Walker and Boyne, 2006). Supervision Office of Health and Social Services evaluates the performance of social services units of local governments and where there is the worst four performances are perceived, the social service is supplied by the private sector and by this, the performance of these units is trying to be improved (Hoogenboezem, 2004).…”

“…It was thought that the problems about budget, personnel, financial management, information system and informatics could be solved with the help of these qualified personnel (Ozer, 2006). US National Performance Evaluation Project, which is seen as the first large scale test about administrative reforms aims to develop the organizational performance in public (Walker and Boyne, 2006); shrinking, decreasing the administrative costs, reforming in the administrative system, decentralizing authority by autonomous institutions, strengthening the employees, providing the cultural changes, improving the service quality, increasing the productivity of institutions studies were the main goals throughout this process which has started in the USA and improved fast with the help of the public (Ozer, 2006).…”