The Impact of Performance Management on Performance in Public Organizations: A Meta‐Analysis

Performance‐based management is pervasive in public organizations; countless governments have implemented performance management systems with the hope that they will improve organizational effectiveness. However, there has been little comprehensive review of their impact. This article conducts a meta‐analysis on the impact of performance management on performance in public organizations. It contributes to the current literature in three ways. First, it examines the effect of the “average” performance management system. Second, it examines the influence of management: whether beneficial performance management practices moderate the average effect. Third, it examines the effect of “time” on performance management. Using 2,188 effects from 49 studies, the analysis finds that performance management has a small average effect. However, the effect is substantially larger when indicators of best practices in high‐quality studies are included, indicating that management practices have an important impact on the effectiveness of performance management systems. Evidence for the effect of time is mixed.     

Introductory Comment on the Consequences of Chernobyl'

Property rights in the new phase of economic reforms in the Soviet Union are reviewed and analyzed by a prominent British economist. The paper details laws and decrees on leasing, land, inventions, joint-stock companies, securities, hard currencies, markets, small business, a state holding company, foreign investment, banking, taxation, monopolies, as well as on property ownership and business units in general. The main federal measures are then compared with relevant provisions in the so-called Shatalin Plan. Included in the effort is a section on terminology pertaining to destatization as well as an assessment of the process of privatization as of early December 1990. Journal of Economic Literature, Classification Numbers: 052, 124, 612.     

Panel on the Economic and Political Consequences of Chernobyl'

This article summarizes a discussion by a panel of leading experts on Soviet energy analyzing the consequences of the accident at the Chernobyl' nuclear plant in the Ukraine on April 26, 1986.

The near-term economic costs associated with clean-up, relocation, and compensating for losses to electricity supplies are significant but manageable. The longer-term effects will focus on likely modifications in Soviet strategies for the nuclear industry, which may shift emphasis back towards conventional fuels and conservation.

The political consequences were managed fairly well by the leadership. Consistent with Secretary Gorbachev's policy of glasnost' (openness) more information has been available on this event than was the case in previous analogous situations. Journal of Economic Literature, Classification Numbers: 027, 124, 723.     

Gorbachev's Economic Reform: A Soviet Economy Roundtable

The proceedings of a panel of American specialists devoted to the recent economic reform are summarized. The panelists noted that the most substantial changes to date have accompanied efforts to restructure the decisionmaking hierarchy—in particular, a recentralization of authority through the creation of biuros and state committees and legislation on individual economic activity. Changes in the systems of economic planning and incentives, on the other hand, have been minor, suggesting a continuing debate over the extent to which price reform and various economic incentives should be implemented. Journal of Economic Literature, Classification Numbers: 052, 113, 124.     

Party Servants,Ideologues or Regional Representatives? The German Länder and the Reform of Federalism

This article considers recent attempts to reform German federalism, the failed 2004 reform, and the reforms agreed in 2006 and 2009. It compares partisan, ideological and territorial factors which contribute to an understanding of reform, finding that all three have a role in explaining actors’ views of reform proposals. Two other claims are developed: that in some aspects of the reforms, a division between ‘generalist’ and ‘subject specialist’ politicians became apparent; and that a decisive change between 2004 and 2006 was the formation of a grand coalition at a federal level, which paved the way for agreement upon reform proposals.