Suchergebnisse

AbstractPortfolio management is widely used by large government agencies and nonprofits, but it is rarely discussed in public administration scholarship. Portfolio management tools can illuminate groups of projects that should be considered as priority investments by highlighting the relationship of risk to outcomes. This article explores historical and theoretical reasons for the neglect of portfolio management, and then proposes using portfolio management to update a classic strategic management framework to guide organizational choices in public administration. Though portfolio management ideas originated in the private sector, public sector portfolio management differs from its private sector counterpart by trading off risk with public value or mission outcomes rather than financial outcomes. Portfolio management is a tool to incorporate risk to mission in investment decisions. It holds promise for adding an intermediate‐level implementation tool to develop theories of public value. The paper concludes with hypotheses for future investigation.

Although there is considerable literature on strategic planning and management in the public sector, there has been little effort to synthesize what has been learned concerning the extent to which these tools are used in government, how they are implemented, and the results they generate. In this article, the authors review the research on strategic planning and management in the public sector to understand what has been learned to date and what gaps in knowledge remain. In examining the 34 research articles in this area published in the major public administration journals over the past 20 years, the authors find substantial empirical testing of the impacts of environmental and institutional/organizational determinants on strategic management, but efforts to assess linkages between strategic planning processes and organizational outcomes or performance improvements are sparse. Large- N quantitative analyses and comparative case studies could improve the knowledge base in this critical area.

The U.S. federal government often devolves administrative processes and decision making to state and local governments. Prior studies have found that the success of decentralization and implementation depends on several mediating factors at the subnational level, such as a state's political ideology or administrative capacity. This study focuses on one mechanism—the ability of states to leverage their information advantage about the local context vis-à-vis the federal government. We are interested in whether the information advantage of state-level firearm background checks decreased the rates of intimate partner violence (IPV) involving a firearm compared to states that relied on federally administered background checks. We take advantage of data from the period of state-mandated stay-at-home (SAH) orders during the COVID-19 pandemic, a temporal context with increased IPV rates. Using a Poisson fixed effects regression, we find that rates of IPV involving a firearm did not increase when the SAH orders were in effect. However, using decision-relevant information in state-administered background checks decreased the rates of IPV resulting in injury and murder-suicide, compared to states that relied on federal background checks.