Suchergebnisse

AbstractMuch research following Kaufman's classic study Are Government Organizations Immortal? has investigated the claim that government agencies enjoy great security and long life. Less attention has been paid to Kaufman's thesis that government agencies facing a termination threat have strong incentives to react. In a study of the on-going Norwegian local government amalgamation reform, we demonstrate that this type of government agency reacts by hoarding (i.e., a last-minute flurry of spending) when faced with a termination threat. This finding shows that agencies facing termination threats are active players in the termination game. We discuss implications for research on agency termination and design implications for reformers of the public sector.

Agencies are small public organizations that can be managed
strategically to achieve a legislated goal. Develops a framework that
can help them do this by working with their five key relationships: the
Minister and Government, the Minister′s department, central control
agencies, the agency′s board, and the professional staff. Suggests a
general approach to a strategy for managing agencies: do the work
envisaged in the founding legislation, while managing the primary
relationships with Minister and Government and the Board, and monitoring
the constraints of lateral relationships and other legislation. Within
this context, set priorities and make choices in terms of managerial
capacities and operate the agency to attain credibility, primarily in
terms of achieving the legislated goal, while developing a reputation
for managerial competence.

This study evaluates an attempt to develop a mediation program within a state environmental agency. A number of concerns arose during the agency's efforts to use mediation, including the neutrality of mediators, the types of cases mediated, the voluntary participation of parties, and acceptance of the mediated agreement. These issues were examined through a case study of a conflict that was mediated by the agency. Based on issues in the case, criteria are suggested which help guard against the problems that arise when government agencies serve a mediating role. These criteria may be useful to any organization that contemplates using mediation to help resolve conflict.

This study aimed to obtain an overview of tax avoidance in government agencies based on the socio-cultural habits of the community. This study uses a qualitative realist ethnographic method to reveal an overview of tax avoidance in government agencies in Madura with the supplier and treasurer informants. The results obtained indicate that tax avoidance in government agencies is influenced by the cultural habit of repaying the kindness of others with kindness in kind. The habit of not being indebted for the kindness of others becomes a factor of pressure and a justification for tax avoidance by splitting proof of expenditure. The opportunity factor that the treasurer has as a central figure in financial management, supported by the provision of split proof of expenditure by suppliers, is a driving factor for tax avoidance in government agencies. The implication of this research is to provide an overview of the causes and modes of tax avoidance in government agencies, so that appropriate tax regulations and supervision can be formed to minimize the occurrence of tax avoidance.

During World War II a system of labor participation and representation emerged in a series of national economic planning agencies. This study is primarily concerned with the representation and participation of organized labor in the activities of the National Defense Advisory Commission, the Office of Production Management, and the War Production Board. Some attention is also given to the War Manpower Commission and the Office of Price Administration.

The purpose of this article is to analyse the design and implementation of strategic planning and performance management in governmental agencies in two Nordic countries, Finland and Norway. Nordic countries are an interesting study from a comparative perspective because while they are commonly assumed to have been high-intensity new public management reformers, they are also commonly assumed to have a distinct public management tradition. Moreover, these two countries are interesting to study because within the Nordic public management tradition, Finland and Norway specifically represent two different public management traditions. Finland belongs to the Eastern Nordic public management tradition, with an emphasis on decentralisation and agency autonomy, while Norway belongs to the Western Nordic public management tradition, with an emphasis on hierarchical governance, and hence, much performance management and reporting. Therefore, we expected to find more decentralised strategic management and an emphasis on evaluation in Finland, and more central, planning-like strategic management and reporting in Norway. Our comparison shows that both countries had mandatory strategic planning and utilised decentralised strategic planning in government agencies. The stronger legal orientation in the public administration in Finland, however, made strategic changes more complicated in Finland than in Norway.

The purpose of this article is to analyse the design and implementation of strategic planning and performance management in governmental agencies in two Nordic countries, Finland and Norway. Nordic countries are an interesting study from a comparative perspective because while they are commonly assumed to have been high-intensity new public management reformers, they are also commonly assumed to have a distinct public management tradition. Moreover, these two countries are interesting to study because within the Nordic public management tradition, Finland and Norway specifically represent two different public management traditions. Finland belongs to the Eastern Nordic public management tradition, with an emphasis on decentralisation and agency autonomy, while Norway belongs to the Western Nordic public management tradition, with an emphasis on hierarchical governance, and hence, much performance management and reporting. Therefore, we expected to find more decentralised strategic management and an emphasis on evaluation in Finland, and more central, planning-like strategic management and reporting in Norway. Our comparison shows that both countries had mandatory strategic planning and utilised decentralised strategic planning in government agencies. The stronger legal orientation in the public administration in Finland, however, made strategic changes more complicated in Finland than in Norway.

The purpose of this article is to analyse the design and implementation of strategic planning and performance management in governmental agencies in two Nordic countries, Finland and Norway. Nordic countries are an interesting study from a comparative perspective because while they are commonly assumed to have been high-intensity new public management reformers, they are also commonly assumed to have a distinct public management tradition. Moreover, these two countries are interesting to study because within the Nordic public management tradition, Finland and Norway specifically represent two different public management traditions. Finland belongs to the Eastern Nordic public management tradition, with an emphasis on decentralisation and agency autonomy, while Norway belongs to the Western Nordic public management tradition, with an emphasis on hierarchical governance, and hence, much performance management and reporting. Therefore, we expected to find more decentralised strategic management and an emphasis on evaluation in Finland, and more central, planning-like strategic management and reporting in Norway. Our comparison shows that both countries had mandatory strategic planning and utilised decentralised strategic planning in government agencies. The stronger legal orientation in the public administration in Finland, however, made strategic changes more complicated in Finland than in Norway. ; publishedVersion

The purpose of this article is to analyse the design and implementation of strategic planning and performance management in governmental agencies in two Nordic countries, Finland and Norway. Nordic countries are an interesting study from a comparative perspective because while they are commonly assumed to have been high-intensity new public management reformers, they are also commonly assumed to have a distinct public management tradition. Moreover, these two countries are interesting to study because within the Nordic public management tradition, Finland and Norway specifically represent two different public management traditions. Finland belongs to the Eastern Nordic public management tradition, with an emphasis on decentralisation and agency autonomy, while Norway belongs to the Western Nordic public management tradition, with an emphasis on hierarchical governance, and hence, much performance management and reporting. Therefore, we expected to find more decentralised strategic management and an emphasis on evaluation in Finland, and more central, planning-like strategic management and reporting in Norway. Our comparison shows that both countries had mandatory strategic planning and utilised decentralised strategic planning in government agencies. The stronger legal orientation in the public administration in Finland, however, made strategic changes more complicated in Finland than in Norway ; publishedVersion

The purpose of this article is to analyse the design and implementation of strategic planning and performance management in governmental agencies in two Nordic countries, Finland and Norway. Nordic countries are an interesting study from a comparative perspective because while they are commonly assumed to have been high-intensity new public management reformers, they are also commonly assumed to have a distinct public management tradition. Moreover, these two countries are interesting to study because within the Nordic public management tradition, Finland and Norway specifically represent two different public management traditions. Finland belongs to the Eastern Nordic public management tradition, with an emphasis on decentralisation and agency autonomy, while Norway belongs to the Western Nordic public management tradition, with an emphasis on hierarchical governance, and hence, much performance management and reporting. Therefore, we expected to find more decentralised strategic management and an emphasis on evaluation in Finland, and more central, planning-like strategic management and reporting in Norway. Our comparison shows that both countries had mandatory strategic planning and utilised decentralised strategic planning in government agencies. The stronger legal orientation in the public administration in Finland, however, made strategic changes more complicated in Finland than in Norway.

" A series of statements submitted on behalf of the railroad industry at hearings before the Subcommittee on Domestic Land and Water Transportation of the Senate Interstate and Foreign Commerce Commttee, held pursuant to Senate Resolution 50, 81st Congress"--Cover. ; Cover title. ; Includes bibliographical references. ; Mode of access: Internet.