Abstract
Public management scholars have long focused on management-oriented performance measurement systems (or MPM). These systems are characterized with an input-process-output-outcome (IPO) measurement scheme and a clear focus on managerial outcomes or effectiveness. The urban and regional planning literature, however, has taken a different path to study performance measurement by examining organizational performance as part of community performance that emphasizes livability and sustainability of community development. The community-oriented performance measurement systems (CPM) emphasize community needs, service affordability, accessibility, and sustainability, not management performance outcomes. This study argues that some pressing problems faced by many MPM systems, such as public apathy and outcome ambiguity, can be resolved or moderated by CPM systems. Public managers may be better off by adopting a measurement system that centers on community livability and sustainability. In this study, we will use data from U.S. cities with populations over 50,000 to answer following questions: What efforts have been made by these governments to adopt community-oriented performance measurement systems? What factors contribute to the adoption of such systems? Why some cities are more advanced than others in the adoption?
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Publication status | Published - 15 Mar 2013 |
| Event | American Society for Public Administration (ASPA)/Conference Proceeding - New Orleans, United States Duration: 15 Mar 2013 → 19 Mar 2013 |
Conference
| Conference | American Society for Public Administration (ASPA)/Conference Proceeding |
|---|---|
| Place | United States |
| City | New Orleans |
| Period | 15/03/13 → 19/03/13 |