The illusion of New Public Management? An analysis of performance-based budgeting in the public sector

Authors

  • Lino Cinquini
  • Sara Giovanna Mauro
  • Daniela Pianezzi

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.7146/propracon.v6i1.25144

Keywords:

New Public Management, Performance Based Budgeting, reality vs illusion in pragmatic constructivism

Abstract

The present research wishes to adopt a pragmatic constructivist approach in order to understand and explain the functionality of private- inspired reforms in the public sector. In particular, the research investigates the introduction and implementation of a relevant but challenging managerial reform, performance- based budgeting (PBB), become widespread in the public sector worldwide.

References

Bogt, H. J., Helden, G. J., & Kolk, B. (2015). Challenging the NPM Ideas About Performance Management: Selectivity and Differentiation in Outcome‐Oriented Performance Budgeting. Financial Accountability & Management, 31(3), 287-315.

Cinquini, L., Tenucci, A., Campanale, C., Passetti, E. (2013). Understanding performance measurement in public organization under pragmatic constructivism. The Actor Reality Perspective Conference.

Dobel, J. P. (1978). The corruption of a state. American Political Science Review, 72(03), 958-973.

Hood, C. (1991). A public management for all seasons?. Public administration, 69(1), 3-19.

Hood, C. (1995). The “New Public Management” in the 1980s: variations on a theme. Accounting, organizations and society, 20(2), 93-109.

Hoskin, K. (2015). What about the box?” Some thoughts on the possibility of ‘corruption prevention’, and of ‘the disciplined and ethical subject. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 28, 71-81.

Hyndman, N., Liguori, M., Meyer, R. E., Polzer, T., Rota, S., & Seiwald, J. (2014). The translation and sedimentation of accounting reforms. A comparison of the UK, Austrian and Italian experiences. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 25(4), 388-408.

Johnston, M. (2015). Making transparency real? Accounting and popular participation in corruption control. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 28, 97-101.

Lapsley, I. (2008). The NPM agenda: back to the future. Financial accountability & management, 24(1), 77-96.

Lehman, G. (2010). Perspectives on accounting, commonalities & the public sphere. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 21(8), 724-738.

Lynn Jr, L. E. (1998). The new public management: How to transform a theme into a legacy. Public Administration Review, 231-237.

Mitchell, F., Nielsen, L. B., Nørreklit, H., & Nørreklit, L. (2013). Scoring strategic performance: a pragmatic constructivist approach to strategic performance measurement. Journal of Management & Governance, 17(1), 5-34.

Morales, J., Gendron, Y., & Guénin-Paracini, H. (2014). The construction of the risky individual and vigilant organization: A genealogy of the fraud triangle. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 39(3), 170-194.

Nørreklit, L. (2011), “Actors and reality: a conceptual framework for creative governance”, in Jakobsen, M., Johansson, I.-L. and Nørreklit, H. (Eds.), An Actor's Approach to Management Conceptual Framework and Company Practices, Djøf/Jurist- og Økonomforbundet, pp. 7-38.

Nørreklit, L., Nørreklit, H., & Israelsen, P. (2006). The validity of management control topoi: towards constructivist pragmatism. Management Accounting Research, 17(1), 42-71.

OECD (2007). Performance budgeting in OECD Countries. OECD Publishing.

Robinson, M. (2007). Performance Budgeting: Linking Funding and Results. International Monetary Fund.

Stiglitz, J. E. (1989). The economic role of the state.

Yin, R. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods. Beverly Hills.

Downloads

Published

2017-01-10

How to Cite

Cinquini, L., Mauro, S. G., & Pianezzi, D. (2017). The illusion of New Public Management? An analysis of performance-based budgeting in the public sector. Proceedings of Pragmatic Constructivism, 6(1), 14–25. https://doi.org/10.7146/propracon.v6i1.25144

Issue

Section

Speeches