A Review of: “How Management Matters: Street-level Bureaucrats and Welfare Reform. by Norma M. Riccucci”

ABSTRACT

In contrast to the other analyses of rankings in this issue, this paper concentrates on analyzing a single specific case of a rankings exercise from the “inside,” in large part relying on documents produced by observer participation. The case that is analyzed in depth is an exercise conducted by the Dutch government in the early 2000s to produce a critical comparison and de facto ranking of public sector performance in the industrialised countries. The paper examines the production process which culminated in the publication of “Public Sector Performance” by the Dutch Social Cultural Planning Office (SCP) in 2004 SCP . 2004 . Public Sector Performance: An International Comparison of Education, Health Care, Law and Order, and Public Administration . The Hague : Sociaal Cultureel Planbureau . [Google Scholar], and in particular the interactions between the civil servants of the SCP and the outside academic body in Belgium that the SCP commissioned to produce the “public administration” component of the ranking exercise.

On the basis of this “inside” analysis, the paper describes how the SCP ranking analysis of public administration was conducted, and examines the process from three complementary and overlapping analytic perspectives drawn from the literature on the politics of evaluation research. Those perspectives are: how supply interacts with demand for ranking surveys, how the “management of meaning” played out in this case, and how culture shapes ranking surveys. The paper shows that in this case the “Say's law” principle of analytic supply leading to political demand did not apply and that there was a mismatch between demand for and supply of public administration indicators. It also shows how ranking exercises can develop in a politico-administrative culture often said to be much more predisposed to “soft consensus” in its operation than that applying in less “consociational” administrative cultures.     

A Review of: “Organizational Knowledge. The Texture of Workplace Learning by Silvia Gherardi with the Collaboration of Davide Nicolini”

ABSTRACT

This article provides new empirical evidence about Flemish municipal councilors’ use of financial information in the yearly budget debate. Since councilors generally do not handle information according to “standard use models,” we adopt an innovative method of data collection by scrutinizing their speech for the presence of financial information during the budget debate in Flemish municipalities. The incorporation of financial information in councilors’ contributions to the debate is conceptualized as a particular form of observable use of financial information. We quantitatively assess the presence of both budgetary and accrual financial information using a scoring technique taken from the management accounting literature. Additionally, we analyze whether various political and financial circumstances affect politicians’ mentioning of this information in their deliberations. Our results reveal a strong prevalence of budgetary information in councilors’ speech. This is influenced by both political conditions and the financial position of the municipality.     

A Review of: “Corruption by Design: Building Clean Government in Mainland China and Hong Kong by Melanie Manion”

ABSTRACT

The impact of privatization on public service quality is an enduring issue in public policy and management. Advocates of privatization suggest that market forces prompt private firms to provide better quality services, while opponents point towards the potential for quality to be traded off against profits. Drawing on incomplete contract and capability theories, we explore a more nuanced possibility: that private providers of public services perform better on dimensions of public service quality that are easier to measure and monitor, and vice versa. Using panel data on service quality in prisons in England and Wales in the period 1998 to 2012, we find that privately managed prisons do perform better on dimensions of quality, such as confinement conditions and prisoner activity, which are more easily measured, whereas public prisons perform better on dimensions of quality, such as levels of order and prisoner safety, which are less easily measured and managed.