Suchergebnisse

Management control and state organizations
The introduction of an actual System of management control within administrative departments can only be envisaged as an attempt to coordinate the existing dissimilar Systems of control. These can be accused of being too meticulous and at the same time inefficient, in part ad-hoc, uncertain and incomplete and allowing too much scope for subjective judgment, yet they cannot be condemned as wholly inappropriate. The only valid solution for a government service is to institute a 3-dimensional System of overall control. The first of these dimensions is one which matches internal control, i.e. the head of an organization's control of his organization, against some form of external control. The second is the dimension concerned with aspects of efficiency and pertinence. The third is one which starts with a System to monitor compliance with the organization's objectives and goes on to measure performance against the objectives and standards set by a higher authority — in this case, the State. A government department's overall System of control needs to be designed with these three dimensions in mind.

Intro -- Contents -- About the Authors -- Abbreviations -- List of Tables -- Part I: Introduction -- Chapter 1: Introduction -- References -- Part II: An Analytical Perspective -- Chapter 2: A Conventional Assessment Agenda -- References -- Chapter 3: An Alternative Methodology -- 3.1 The Foundations of an Assessment Framework -- 3.2 A Test: Central Government Reforms in France -- References -- Part III: Comprehensive Policies -- Chapter 4: Birth, Life and Termination of Comprehensive Approaches -- 4.1 The Rationalization of Budgetary Choices -- 4.2 The Renewal of Public Service Operation -- 4.3 The Reform of the State and Public Service -- 4.4 The Revision of the Organic Law Governing Budgetary Laws -- 4.5 The Modernization Audits Reform -- 4.6 The Public Policy General Review -- 4.7 The Modernization of Public Action Operation -- 4.8 The Public Action 2022 Programme -- References -- Chapter 5: A Recurrent Process of Fabrication -- 5.1 Apparent Discontinuity -- 5.2 The Same Tune -- Reference -- Part IV: The Appropriation of Toolkits -- Chapter 6: Dashboards and Cost-Benefit Analysis -- 6.1 Tools That Reign but Do Not Govern: Dashboards and Indicators -- 6.2 Cost-Benefit Analysis and Friends -- References -- Chapter 7: Evaluation and a Comparison -- 7.1 A Chaotic Journey: Ex Post Evaluation -- 7.2 A Comparative Assessment of Three Toolkits -- References -- Part V: Indirect Reforms -- Chapter 8: Well-tempered Agencification -- 8.1 Productive Agencies -- 8.2 Regulatory Authorities -- 8.3 To Each Their Own Prism -- References -- Chapter 9: From Espoused Theories to Theories in Use -- 9.1 Devolution -- 9.2 The Public Health System -- 9.3 State Field Agencies -- 9.4 A Comparative Assessment of Theories in Use -- References -- Chapter 10: Human Resources: A Keystone Structure -- 10.1 The Creation of the Basic Structure.

L'inflation normative est au centre des critiques. La doctrine est unanime pour dénoncer ce que les académiques comme les praticiens considèrent comme une dérive aux conséquences néfastes sur les individus comme sur les personnes morales et un danger pour la sécurité juridique. Sous l'impulsion du Conseil d'État, le gouvernement français a proposé un ensemble d'indicateurs non destinés à maîtriser l'inflation, mais plutôt à suivre l'activité normative. Cet article montre les limites de cette nouvelle tentative de mise en chiffres du droit par un outil de contrôle de gestion. Il propose, à partir de l'analyse des données élémentaires de l'accroissement de l'inflation législative sur trois ans, de nouvelles pistes de réflexion pour saisir les facteurs inflationnistes.