Abstract
Though public productivity is most often discussed and measured in terms of service delivery or output measures, the authors argue that process, or institutional change, measures are also important. The State Small Cities Community Development Block Grant Program is examined to determine who participates in program design and choice of performance criteria. The analysis asks whether the nature of that participation is linked to the adoption of specific performance criteria and whether it is possible to determine, early in the life of a program, what kinds of performance criteria are dictated by participation and design considerations.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Ammons, D. N. and J. C. King (1983), ‘Productivity improvement in local Governments: its place among competing priorities’, Public Administration Review, (March/April) vol. 45, pp. 113–20.
Balk, W. L. (ed.) (1978), Symposium on ‘Productivity in Government’, Public Administration Review (Jan/Feb), vol. 38, pp. 1–52.
Bardach, E. (1977), The Implementation Game ( Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).
Bleakley, K., C. Ferguson, C. Pendone, M. Millman and E. Small ( 1983; May), The State Community Development Block Grant Program: The first year’s experience, Unpublished final report ( Washington, DC: US Department of Housing and Urban Development).
Brigham, J. and D. Brown (eds) (1983), Policy implementation: Penalties or incentives? ( Beverly Hills, CA: Sage ).
Bullock, C. S., J. E. Anderson and D. W. Brady (1983), Public Policy in the Eighties ( Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole).
Burkhead, J. and P. J. Hennigan (1978), ‘Productivity Analysis: A search for Definition and Order’, Public Administration Review (Jan/Feb), vol. 38, pp. 34–40.
Elmore, R. L. (1982), ‘Backward mapping: Implementation research and policy Decisions’, in W. Williams (ed.), Studying implementation: methodological and administrative issues ( Chatham, NJ: Chatham House ), pp. 18–35.
Greiner, J. M., H. P. Hatry, M. Kass, A. P. Miller and J. P. Woodward (1981), Productivity and Motivation: A Review of State and Local Government Initiatives ( Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press).
Hatry, H. P. (1976), ‘Issues in Productivity Measurement for Local Government’, in Holzer, M. (ed.), Productivity in Public Organizations ( Port Washington, NY: Kennikat Press ) pp. 89–105.
Henry, N. (1975), Public Administration and Public Affairs ( Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall).
Ingraham, P. (1982, March) Unpublished raw data ( SUNY Survey, Center for Social Analysis).
Jones, C. O. (1977), An Introduction to the Study of Public Policy ( North Scituate, MA: Duxbury).
Keevey, R. (1980), ‘State productivity inprovements: Building on existing Strengths’, Public Administration Review (Sept/Oct), vol. 40, pp. 451–8.
Lynn, L. E. (1981), Managing the Public’s Business ( New York: Basic Books).
Mayntz, R. (1983), ‘The conditions of Effective Public policy: A new challenge for policy analysis’, Policy and Politics, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 123–43.
Nakamura, R. and F Smallwood (1980), The Politics of Policy Implementation ( New York: St. Martin’s).
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 1988 Policy Studies Organization
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Ingraham, P.W., Anderson, S.H. (1988). Assessing the Relationships between Program Design and Productivity: A Framework for Analysis. In: Kelly, R.M. (eds) Promoting Productivity in the Public Sector. Policy Studies Organization Series. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-08885-0_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-08885-0_4
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-08887-4
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-08885-0
eBook Packages: Palgrave Business & Management CollectionBusiness and Management (R0)