Summary Execution: The Impact of Alternative Summarization Strategies on Local Governments

Drew, J; Dollery, B

Summary Execution: The Impact of Alternative Summarization Strategies on Local Governments

Drew, J

Dollery, B

Permalink

Publisher:: Auburn University of Montgomery; 1999
Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: Public Administration Quarterly, 2016, 40 (4), pp. 814 - 841
Issue Date:: 2016-12-01

Open Access

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Open Access

This item is open access.

Adobe PDF

Download Accepted Manuscript VersionAdobe PDF (632.52 kB)

View statistics

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Drew, J https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3579-5758	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Dollery, B	en_US
dc.date.issued	2016-12-01	en_US
dc.identifier.citation	Public Administration Quarterly, 2016, 40 (4), pp. 814 - 841	en_US
dc.identifier.issn	0734-9149	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/41809
dc.description.abstract	Performance management in the public sector, including local government, has become far more pervasive in recent decades. Often performance indicators are summarized into a single score to enhance understanding and ease dissemination. However, the summation of performance indicators caries a risk that the rating assigned may largely be an artefact of the summarization strategy rather than an accurate representation of municipal performance. We employ the recent evaluation of New South Wales’ municipal performance to demonstrate that the performance indicator compilation strategy is indeed a major determinant of the ratings assigned to local councils. Moreover, we illustrate how ratings may exert a constitutive effect on municipalities by altering organizational behavior. A number of policy lessons are drawn from our empirical analysis, including significant methodological considerations and the need for higher levels of transparency.	en_US
dc.publisher	Auburn University of Montgomery; 1999	en_US
dc.relation.ispartof	Public Administration Quarterly	en_US
dc.title	Summary Execution: The Impact of Alternative Summarization Strategies on Local Governments	en_US
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	4	en_US
utslib.citation.volume	40	en_US
utslib.for	1605 Policy and Administration	en_US
pubs.embargo.period	Not known	en_US
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/DVC (Research)
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/DVC (Research)/lnstitute for Public Policy and Governance
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Strength - IPPG - Institute for Public Policy and Governance
utslib.copyright.status	open_access
pubs.consider-herdc	false	en_US
pubs.issue	4	en_US
pubs.volume	40	en_US

Abstract:

Performance management in the public sector, including local government, has become far more pervasive in recent decades. Often performance indicators are summarized into a single score to enhance understanding and ease dissemination. However, the summation of performance indicators caries a risk that the rating assigned may largely be an artefact of the summarization strategy rather than an accurate representation of municipal performance. We employ the recent evaluation of New South Wales’ municipal performance to demonstrate that the performance indicator compilation strategy is indeed a major determinant of the ratings assigned to local councils. Moreover, we illustrate how ratings may exert a constitutive effect on municipalities by altering organizational behavior. A number of policy lessons are drawn from our empirical analysis, including significant methodological considerations and the need for higher levels of transparency.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/41809