Buradasınız

Anasayfa » Content

PERFORMANS KULLANMA KAMU YÖNETİMİNDE GÖSTERGELER: İNGİLİZ deneyimlerinden dersler

USINGPERFORMANCE INDICATOR S INPUBLIC ADMINISTRATION: LESSONS FROM THE BRITISH EXPERIENCE

Journal Name:

  • Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi

Publication Year:

  • 2001
Author NameUniversity of AuthorFaculty of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
"...that the notion of performance - often bereft of normative standards, invariably full of ambiguity - is, in theory and practice, both contestable and complex." "A measure is a direct quantification of output or of some aspect of performance. An indicator is a statistic which gives some information about output orperformance."'
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language): 
Bir örgütün veya kişinin performansını ölçmek özel sektör kadar kamu örgütleri için de önemlidir. Bu nedenle, performans yönetimi ve özellikle performans kriterlerinin kamu sektöründe kullanımı birçok ülkede giderek yaygınlık kazanmaktadır. Bu çalışmada İngiliz kamu yönetiminde performans yönetimi insiyatifleri ve performans kriterlerinin kullanımı örnek olay olarak alınmakta; hem örgütsel hem de personel bazında performans kriterlerinin kullanımından doğan fayda ve sakıncalar incelenmektedir.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastirmax-performans-kullanma-kamu-yonetiminde-gostergeler-ingiliz-deneyimlerinden-dersler.pdf
  • 2
15-27
  • Turkish

REFERENCES

References: 

1. BECKER Saul (ed) (1991) Windows of Opportunity - Public Policy and the Poor, London: CPAG
2. CARSWELL John (1985) Government and the Universities in Britain - Programme and Performance 1960-1980, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
3. CARTER N (1991) 'Learning to Measure Performance: the use of indicators in organisations', Public Administration, Spring, vol 69, pp. 85-102
4. CARTER N, GREER P (1993) 'Evaluating Agencies: Next Steps and Performance Indicators', Public Administration, Autumn, vol 71, pp. 407-16
5. CARTER et al (1994) How Organisations Measure Success, London: MacMillan
6. FARNHAM D, HORTON S (eds) (1993) Managing the New Public Services, London: MacMillan
7. GUARDIAN NEWSPAPER (Society Section) (1994) "Terminological Inexactitude?" London: The Guardian Newspaper 14.12.1994, pp.2
8. HENKEL Mary (1991) Government, Evaluation and Change, London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers
9. HILL Michael (ed) (1993) New Agendas in the Study of the Policy Process, London: Harvester Wheatsheaf
10. HOGWOOD Brian (1992) Trends in British Public Policy, Buckingham: Open University Press
25
11. HMSO (1991) The Citizen's Charter - Raising the Standard, London: HMSO cmd 1599
12. H M TREASURY (1992) Executive Agencies - A guide to setting targets and measuringperformance, London: HMSO
13. JACKSON Peter (1993a), 'Editorial: Public Sector Performance - The Unended Quest', Public Money & Management, October-December 1993, pp.3-4
14. JACKSON Peter (1993b), 'Public Service Performance Evaluation: A Strategic Perspective, Public Money & Management, October-December 1993, pp. 9-14
15. JOWETT P, ROTHWELL M (1988) Performance Indicators in the Public Sector, Hampshire: MacMillan Press
16. KOUWENHOVEN V (1993) "The rise of the public private partnership: A model for the management of public-private cooperation", in Jan Kooiman (ed) (1993) Modern Governance - New Government Society Interactions, London: Sage Publications, pp.119¬130
17. LAWTON A, ROSE A G (1991) Organisation and Management in the Public Sector, London: Pitman Publishing
18. Office of Management and Budget, General Accounting Office, and Civil Service Commission (1996) The Report to President and Congress of the Joint Financial Management Improvement Programme, Washington, D.C.
19. WALSH K (1991) 'Quality and Public Services', Public Administration, Winter, vol 69, pp.503-14
20. ZIFCAK Spencer (1994) New Managerialism - Administrative Reform in Whitehall and Canberra, Buckingham: Open University Press

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com