Look for the Silver Lining: When Performance-Based Accountability Systems Work

Abstract

In advancing improved accountability and performance, governments have relied upon one or more of the following approaches: political accountability or improved responsiveness to political direction, legal accountability or contract accountability, and performance‐based accountability. This article examines the major approach to the last, managing for results (MFR), in the context of the American states. All state governments seek to improve decision making by employing MFR models but with clear differences in the degree of quality. States regarded as having strong MFR systems devote energy to integrative facilitators: practical actions that ensure that the links between components of the MFR system connect, provide quality performance information, and facilitate information exchange and utilization. The facilitators identified are the comprehensiveness of the MFR system, vertical integration of goals, strong strategic guidance for agency efforts, balance between bottom‐up and top‐down approaches, and leadership and political commitment.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 64 citations exist upstream.