Decentralized decisions among government officials can cause dramatic inconsistencies in bureaucratic decision making. This article provides a synthetic review of the evidence base for improving the quality of bureaucratic decisions and reducing such street-level arbitrariness. First, we offer a typology to unify quality assurance management techniques often treated in distinct scholarly literatures. This synthesis reveals common challenges but also points to novel hybrid solutions that borrow across management techniques. Second, although empirical evidence is limited, our review suggests that ongoing management techniques, such as monitoring, peer review, and pay-for-performance, are more successful than ex post techniques, such as audits and appeals. Third, performance measurement and pay exacerbate the quantity–quality trade-off long opined about in public administration. We offer suggestions for future directions—most importantly, the vital role of academic-agency research collaborations in crafting quality improvement efforts—to address this endemic challenge to bureaucracy and rule of law.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


Literature Cited

  1. An LC, Bluhm JH, Foldes SS, Alesci NL, Klatt CM. et al. 2008. A randomized trial of a pay-for-performance program targeting clinician referral to a state tobacco quitline. Arch. Intern. Med. 168:181993–99 [Google Scholar]
  2. Asch BJ. 1990. Do incentives matter? The case of Navy recruiters. Ind. Labor Relat. Rev. 43:389S–106S [Google Scholar]
  3. Ashraf N, Bandiera O, Lee SS. 2014. Awards unbundled: evidence from a natural field experiment. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 100:44–63 [Google Scholar]
  4. Banerjee AV, Banerji R, Duflo E, Glennerster R, Khemani S. 2010. Pitfalls of participatory programs: evidence from a randomized evaluation in education in India. Am. Econ. J. Econ. Policy 2:11–30 [Google Scholar]
  5. Banerjee AV, Chattopadhyay R, Duflo E, Keniston D, Singh N. 2012. Can institutions be reformed from within? Evidence from a randomized experiment with the Rajasthan police Work. Pap. 12-04 Mass. Inst. Technol Cambridge, MA: [Google Scholar]
  6. Banerjee AV, Duflo E, Glennerster R. 2008. Putting a Band-Aid on a corpse: incentives for nurses in the Indian public health care system. J. Eur. Econ. Assoc. 6:2–3487–500 [Google Scholar]
  7. Barankay I. 2012. Rank incentives: evidence from a randomized workplace experiment Discuss. Pap., Univ. Penn Philadelphia, PA: [Google Scholar]
  8. Bardach E, Kagan RA. 1982. Going by the Book: The Problem of Regulatory Unreasonableness Philadelphia: Temple Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  9. Barnow BS. 2000. Exploring the relationship between performance management and program impact: a case study of the Job Training Partnership Act. J. Policy Anal. Manag. 19:1118–41 [Google Scholar]
  10. Barnow BS, Heinrich CJ. 2010. One standard fits all? The pros and cons of performance standard adjustments. Public Adm. Rev. 70:160–71 [Google Scholar]
  11. Barnow BS, Smith JA. 2004. Performance management of US job training programs. Job Training Policy in the United States CJ O'Leary, RA Straits, SA Wandner 21–56 Kalamazoo, MI: WE Upjohn Inst. [Google Scholar]
  12. Basinga P, Gertler PJ, Binagwaho A, Soucat AL, Sturdy J, Vermeersch CM. 2011. Effect on maternal and child health services in Rwanda of payment to primary health-care providers for performance: an impact evaluation. Lancet 377:97751421–28 [Google Scholar]
  13. Behn RD. 2003. Why measure performance? Different purposes require different measures. Public Adm. Rev. 63:5586–606 [Google Scholar]
  14. Ben-Shahar O, Schneider CE. 2014. More Than You Wanted to Know: The Failure of Mandated Disclosure Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  15. Bernstein ES. 2012. The transparency paradox: a role for privacy in organizational learning and operational control. Adm. Sci. Q. 57:2181–216 [Google Scholar]
  16. Besley TJ, Bevan G, Burchardi K. 2009. Naming & shaming: the impacts of different regimes on hospital waiting times in England and Wales Discuss. Pap., Cent. Econ. Policy Res London: [Google Scholar]
  17. Bjorkman Nyqvist M, De Walque D, Svensson J. 2014. Information is power: experimental evidence on the long-run impact of community based monitoring Policy Res. Work. Pap. 7015 World Bank Washington, DC: [Google Scholar]
  18. Blanes i Vidal J, Nossol M. 2011. Tournaments without prizes: evidence from personnel records. Manag. Sci. 57:101721–36 [Google Scholar]
  19. Bol JC, Smith SD. 2011. Spillover effects in subjective performance evaluation: bias and the asymmetric influence of controllability. Account. Rev. 86:41213–30 [Google Scholar]
  20. Bouguen A. 2016. Adjusting content to individual student needs: further evidence from an in-service teacher training program. Econ. Educ. Rev. 50:90–112 [Google Scholar]
  21. Bowman CL, McCormick S. 2000. Comparison of peer coaching versus traditional supervision effects. J. Educ. Res. 93:4256–61 [Google Scholar]
  22. Braithwaite J, Braithwaite V. 1995. The politics of legalism: rules versus standards in nursing-home regulations. Soc. Legal Stud. 4:307–41 [Google Scholar]
  23. Burgess S, Propper C, Ratto M, Scholder K, von Hinke S, Tominey E. 2010. Smarter task assignment or greater effort: the impact of incentives on team performance. Econ. J. 120:547968–89 [Google Scholar]
  24. Burgess S, Propper C, Ratto M, Tominey E. 2012. Incentives in the public sector: evidence from a government agency Discuss. Pap. 6738 Inst Study Labor, Bonn, Ger.: [Google Scholar]
  25. Burgess S, Wilson D, Worth J. 2013. A natural experiment in school accountability: the impact of school performance information on pupil progress. J. Public Econ. 106:57–67 [Google Scholar]
  26. Callen M, Gulzar S, Hasanain A, Khan Y, Rezaee A. 2015. Personalities and public sector performance: evidence from a health experiment in Pakistan Work. Pap. 21180 Natl. Bur. Econ. Res Cambridge, MA: [Google Scholar]
  27. Casalino LP, Gans D, Weber R, Cea M, Tuchovsky A. et al. 2016. US physician practices spend more than $15.4 billion annually to report quality measures. Health Aff 35:3401–6 [Google Scholar]
  28. Chakrabarti R. 2013. Accountability with voucher threats, responses, and the test-taking population: regression discontinuity evidence from Florida. Education 8:2121–67 [Google Scholar]
  29. Chen D, Kremer M. 2002. Interim report on a teacher attendance incentive program in Kenya Manuscr., Harvard Univ Cambridge, MA: http://users.nber.org/∼dlchen/papers/Interim_Report_on_a_Teacher_Attendance_Incentive_Program_in_Kenya.pdf [Google Scholar]
  30. Chen T-T, Chung K-P, Lin I, Lai M-S. 2011. The unintended consequence of diabetes mellitus pay-for-performance (P4P) program in Taiwan: Are patients with more comorbidities or more severe conditions likely to be excluded from the P4P program?. Health Serv. Res. 46:147–60 [Google Scholar]
  31. Cofer DP. 1985a. The question of independence continues: administrative law judges within the Social Security Administration. Judicature 69:228–35 [Google Scholar]
  32. Cofer DP. 1985b. Judges, Bureaucrats, and the Question of Independence: A Study of the Social Security Administration Hearing Process Westport, CT: Greenwood [Google Scholar]
  33. Courty P, Kim DH, Marschke G. 2011. Curbing cream-skimming: evidence on enrolment incentives. Labour Econ 18:5643–55 [Google Scholar]
  34. Courty P, Marschke G. 1997. Measuring government performance: lessons from a federal job-training program. Am. Econ. Rev. 87:2383–88 [Google Scholar]
  35. Courty P, Marschke G. 2004. An empirical investigation of gaming responses to explicit performance incentives. J. Labor Econ. 22:123–56 [Google Scholar]
  36. Cuéllar M-F. 2006. Auditing executive discretion. Notre Dame Rev 82:227–311 [Google Scholar]
  37. Cullen JB, Reback R. 2006. Tinkering toward accolades: school gaming under a performance accountability system Work Pap. 12286 Natl. Bur. Econ. Res Cambridge, MA: [Google Scholar]
  38. Dhaliwal I, Hanna R. 2014. Deal with the devil: the successes and limitations of bureaucratic reform in India Work. Pap. 20482 Natl. Bur. Econ. Res Cambridge, MA: [Google Scholar]
  39. Dixit A. 2002. Incentives and organizations in the public sector: an interpretative review. J. Hum. Resour. 37:4696–727 [Google Scholar]
  40. Dowling B, Richardson R. 1997. Evaluating performance-related pay for managers in the National Health Service. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 8:3348–66 [Google Scholar]
  41. Dranove D, Kessler D, McClellan M, Satterthwaite M. 2003. Is more information better? The effects of “report cards” on health care providers. J. Political Econ. 111:3555–88 [Google Scholar]
  42. Duflo E, Greenstone M, Pande R, Ryan N. 2013a. What does reputation buy? Differentiation in a market for third-party auditors. Am. Econ. Rev. 103:3314–19 [Google Scholar]
  43. Duflo E, Greenstone M, Pande R, Ryan N. 2013b. Truth-telling by third-party auditors and the response of polluting firms: experimental evidence from India. Q. J. Econ. 128:41499–545 [Google Scholar]
  44. Duflo E, Greenstone M, Pande R, Ryan N. 2014. The value of regulatory discretion: estimates from environmental inspections in India Work. Pap. 20590 Natl. Bur. Econ. Res Cambridge, MA: [Google Scholar]
  45. Duflo E, Hanna R, Ryan SP. 2012. Incentives work: getting teachers to come to school. Am. Econ. Rev. 102:41241–78 [Google Scholar]
  46. Eijkenaar F. 2013. Key issues in the design of pay for performance programs. Eur. J. Health Econ. 14:1117–31 [Google Scholar]
  47. Faber M, Bosch M, Wollersheim H, Leatherman S, Grol R. 2009. Public reporting in health care: How do consumers use quality-of-care information? A systematic review. Med. Care 4711–8 [Google Scholar]
  48. Fairbrother G, Hanson KL, Friedman S, Butts GC. 1999. The impact of physician bonuses, enhanced fees, and feedback on childhood immunization coverage rates. Am. J. Public Health 89:2171–75 [Google Scholar]
  49. Figlio DN, Getzler LS. 2006. Accountability, ability and disability: Gaming the system. Adv. Appl. Microecon. 14:35–49 [Google Scholar]
  50. Figlio DN, Rouse CE. 2006. Do accountability and voucher threats improve low-performing schools?. J. Public Econ. 90:1239–55 [Google Scholar]
  51. Finan F, Olken BA, Pande R. 2015. The personnel economics of the state Work. Pap. 21825 Natl. Bur. Econ. Res Cambridge, MA: [Google Scholar]
  52. Forsetlund L, Bjorndal A, Rashidian A, Jamtvedt G, O'Brien MA. et al. 2009. Continuing education meetings and workshops: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2:2CD003030 [Google Scholar]
  53. Fryer RG. 2011. Teacher incentives and student achievement: evidence from New York City public schools Work. Pap. 16850 Natl. Bur. Econ. Res Cambridge, MA: [Google Scholar]
  54. Fryer RG Jr., Levitt SD, List J, Sadoff S. 2012. Enhancing the efficacy of teacher incentives through loss aversion: a field experiment Work. Pap. 18237 Natl. Bur. Econ. Res Cambridge, MA: [Google Scholar]
  55. Fung A, Graham M, Weil D. 2007. Full Disclosure: The Perils and Promise of Transparency Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  56. Fung CH, Lim Y-W, Mattke S, Damberg C, Shekelle PG. 2008. Systematic review: the evidence that publishing patient care performance data improves quality of care. Ann. Intern. Med. 148:2111–23 [Google Scholar]
  57. Gattellari M, Donnelly N, Taylor N, Meerkin M, Hirst G, Ward JE. 2005. Does “peer coaching” increase GP capacity to promote informed decision making about PSA screening? A cluster randomised trial. Fam. Pract. 22:3253–65 [Google Scholar]
  58. Gawande A. 2010. The Checklist Manifesto: How to Get Things Right London: Macmillan [Google Scholar]
  59. Gelbach JB, Marcus D. 2016. A study of social security disability litigation in the federal courts Final Rep., Adm. Conf. US Washington, DC: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2821861 [Google Scholar]
  60. Gerken HK. 2009. The Democracy Index: Why Our Election System Is Failing and How to Fix It Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  61. Gertler PJ, Vermeersch C. 2012. Using performance incentives to improve health outcomes Policy Res. Work. Pap. 6100 World Bank Washington, DC: [Google Scholar]
  62. Glazerman S, Seifullah A. 2012. An evaluation of the Chicago Teacher Advancement Program (Chicago TAP) after four years Final Rep., Math. Policy Res Washington, DC: [Google Scholar]
  63. Glewwe P, Ilias N, Kremer M. 2010. Teacher incentives. Am. Econ. J. Appl. Econ. 2:3205–27 [Google Scholar]
  64. Goldstein J. 2007. Easy to dance to: solving the problems of teacher evaluation with peer assistance and review. Am. J. Educ. 113:3479–508 [Google Scholar]
  65. Greenberg DH, Michalopoulos C, Robins PK. 2003. A meta-analysis of government-sponsored training programs. Ind. Labor Relat. Rev. 57:131–53 [Google Scholar]
  66. Greenberg DH, Michalopoulos C, Robins PK. 2006. Do experimental and nonexperimental evaluations give different answers about the effectiveness of government-funded training programs?. J. Policy Anal. Manag. 25:3523–52 [Google Scholar]
  67. Haga BI, Richman R, Leavitt W. 2010. System failure: implementing pay for performance in the Department of Defense's National Security Personnel System. Public Pers. Manag. 39:3211–30 [Google Scholar]
  68. Hannan EL, Kilburn H, Racz M, Shields E, Chassin MR. 1994. Improving the outcomes of coronary artery bypass surgery in New York State. JAMA 271:10761–66 [Google Scholar]
  69. Hannan EL, Siu AL, Kumar D, Racz M, Pryor DB, Chassin MR. 1997. Assessment of coronary artery bypass graft surgery performance in New York: Is there a bias against taking high-risk patients?. Med. Care 35149–56 [Google Scholar]
  70. Hasnain Z, Pierskalla JH, Manning N. 2012. Performance-related pay in the public sector: a review of theory and evidence Policy Res. Work. Pap. 6043 World Bank Washington, DC: [Google Scholar]
  71. Hausman D. 2016. The failure of immigration appeals. Univ. Pa. Law Rev. 164:51177–238 [Google Scholar]
  72. Heckman J, Heinrich C, Smith J. 2002. The performance of performance standards Work. Pap. 9002 Natl. Bur. Econ. Res Cambridge, MA: [Google Scholar]
  73. Heckman JJ, Heinrich CJ, Smith J. 2011. Do short-run performance measures predict long-run impacts?. The Performance of Performance Standards JJ Heckman, CJ Heinrich 273–304 Kalamazoo, MI: WE Upjohn Inst. [Google Scholar]
  74. Heckman JJ, Smith JA. 2003. The determinants of participation in a social program: Evidence from a prototypical job training program Work. Pap. 9818 Natl. Bur. Econ. Res Cambridge, MA: [Google Scholar]
  75. Heckman JJ, Smith JA, Taber C. 1996. What do bureaucrats do? The effects of performance standards and bureaucratic preferences on acceptance into the JTPA program Work. Pap. 5535 Natl. Bur. Econ. Res Cambridge, MA: [Google Scholar]
  76. Heinrich CJ. 2007. Evidence-based policy and performance management challenges and prospects in two parallel movements. Am. Rev. Public Adm. 37:3255–77 [Google Scholar]
  77. Heinrich CJ. 2012. How credible is the evidence, and does it matter? An analysis of the Program Assessment Rating Tool. Public Adm. Rev. 72:1123–34 [Google Scholar]
  78. Hibbard JH, Jewett JJ, Legnini MW, Tusler M. 1997. Choosing a health plan: Do large employers use the data. Health Aff 16:6172–80 [Google Scholar]
  79. Hibbard JH, Stockard J, Tusler M. 2003. Does publicizing hospital performance stimulate quality improvement efforts?. Health Aff 22:284–94 [Google Scholar]
  80. Hill HC, Beisiegel M, Jacob R. 2013. Professional development research consensus, crossroads, and challenges. Educ. Res. 42:9476–87 [Google Scholar]
  81. Hillman AL, Ripley K, Goldfarb N, Nuamah I, Weiner J, Lusk E. 1998. Physician financial incentives and feedback: failure to increase cancer screening in Medicaid managed care. Am. J. Public Health 88:111699–701 [Google Scholar]
  82. Hillman AL, Ripley K, Goldfarb N, Weiner J, Nuamah I, Lusk E. 1999. The use of physician financial incentives and feedback to improve pediatric preventive care in Medicaid managed care. Pediatrics 104:4931–35 [Google Scholar]
  83. Ho DE. 2012. Fudging the nudge: information disclosure and restaurant grading. Yale Law J 122:3522–688 [Google Scholar]
  84. Ho DE. 2017. Does peer review work? An experiment of experimentalism. Stanford Law Rev 69:1–119 [Google Scholar]
  85. Holmstrom B, Milgrom P. 1991. Multitask principal-agent analyses: incentive contracts, asset ownership, and job design. J. Law Econ. Organ. 7:24–52 [Google Scholar]
  86. Hysong SJ. 2009. Meta-analysis: audit & feedback features impact effectiveness on care quality. Med. Care 473356–63 [Google Scholar]
  87. Ivers N, Jamtvedt G, Flottorp S, Young JM, Odgaard-Jensen J. et al. 2012. Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2012:6CD000259 https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD000259.pub3 [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  88. Jacob BA, Lefgren L. 2005. Principals as agents: Subjective performance measurement in education Work. Pap. 11463 Natl. Bur. Econ. Res Cambridge, MA: [Google Scholar]
  89. Jacob BA, Levitt SD. 2003. Rotten apples: an investigation of the prevalence and predictors of teacher cheating Work. Pap. 9413 Natl. Bur. Econ. Res Cambridge, MA: [Google Scholar]
  90. Jamtvedt G, Young JM, Kristoffersen DT, O'Brien MA, Oxman AD. 2007. Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2007:1CD000260 [Google Scholar]
  91. Kerr S. 1975. On the folly of rewarding A, while hoping for B. Acad. Manag. J. 18:4769–83 [Google Scholar]
  92. Ketelaar NA, Faber MJ, Flottorp S, Rygh LH, Deane KH, Eccles MP. 2011. Public release of performance data in changing the behaviour of healthcare consumers, professionals or organisations. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2011:11CD004538 [Google Scholar]
  93. Khan AQ, Khwaja AI, Olken BA. 2014. Tax farming redux: experimental evidence on performance pay for tax collectors Work. Pap. 20627 Natl. Bur. Econ. Res Cambridge, MA: [Google Scholar]
  94. Koch CH Jr., Koplow DA. 1989. The fourth bite at the apple: a study of the operation and utility of the Social Security Administration's Appeals Council. Fla. State Univ. Law Rev. 17:199–324 [Google Scholar]
  95. Kouides RW, Bennett NM, Lewis B, Cappuccio JD, Barker WH. et al. 1998. Performance-based physician reimbursement and influenza immunization rates in the elderly. Am. J. Prev. Med. 14:289–95 [Google Scholar]
  96. Kravchuk RS, Schack RW. 1996. Designing effective performance-measurement systems under the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993. Public Adm. Rev. 56:4348–58 [Google Scholar]
  97. Krieg JM. 2008. Are students left behind? The distributional effects of the No Child Left Behind Act. Education 3:2250–81 [Google Scholar]
  98. Kurtz H. 1988. 28 New York City restaurant inspectors accused of extortion. Washington PostMarch 25 https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1988/03/25/28-new-york-city-restaurant-inspectors-accused-of-extortion/7cceaf7f-659b-4f27-b6f2-694322701276/?utm_term=.5adc593c9baf [Google Scholar]
  99. Lavy V. 2009. Performance pay and teachers' effort, productivity, and grading ethics. Am. Econ. Rev. 99:51979–2021 [Google Scholar]
  100. Lindblom CE. 1959. The science of “muddling through.”. Public Adm. Rev. 19:279–88 [Google Scholar]
  101. Lipsky M. 1983. Street-Level Bureaucracy: The Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Service New York City: Russell Sage Found. [Google Scholar]
  102. Longo DR, Land G, Schramm W, Fraas J, Hoskins B, Howell V. 1997. Consumer reports in health care: Do they make a difference in patient care. JAMA 278:191579–84 [Google Scholar]
  103. Mallette B, Maheady L, Harper GF. 1999. The effects of reciprocal peer coaching on preservice general educators' instruction of students with special learning needs. Teach. Educ. Spec. Educ. 22:4201–16 [Google Scholar]
  104. Mansouri M, Lockyer J. 2007. A meta-analysis of continuing medical education effectiveness. J. Contin. Educ. Health Prof. 27:16–15 [Google Scholar]
  105. Marschke G. 2002. Performance incentives and organizational behavior: evidence from a federal bureaucracy Work. Pap., Univ Albany, NY: [Google Scholar]
  106. Marshall M, Shekelle P, Brook R, Leatherman S. 2000. Dying to Know: Public Release of Information about Quality of Health Care London: Nuffield Trust [Google Scholar]
  107. Mashaw JL. 1973. Management side of due process: some theoretical and litigation notes on the assurance of accuracy fairness and timeliness in the adjudication of social welfare claims. Cornell Rev 59:772–824 [Google Scholar]
  108. Mashaw JL, Goetz CJ, Goodman FI, Schwartz WF, Verkuil PF, Carrow MM. 1978. Social Security Hearings and Appeals: A Study of the Social Security Administration Hearing System Lanham, MD: Lexington Books [Google Scholar]
  109. Mason D, Hillenbrand C, Money K. 2014. Are informed citizens more trusting? Transparency of performance data and trust towards a British police force. J. Bus. Ethics 122:2321–41 [Google Scholar]
  110. McDonald R, Roland M. 2009. Pay for performance in primary care in England and California: comparison of unintended consequences. Ann. Fam. Med. 7:2121–27 [Google Scholar]
  111. Miller B, Keith LC, Holmes JS. 2014. Immigration Judges and U.S. Asylum Policy. Philadelphia: Univ. Pa. Press [Google Scholar]
  112. Morgan RL, Gustafson KJ, Hudson PJ, Salzberg CL. 1992. Peer coaching in a preservice special education program. Teach. Educ. Spec. Educ. 15:4249–58 [Google Scholar]
  113. Muralidharan K, Sundararaman V. 2011. Teacher performance pay: experimental evidence from India. J. Political Econ. 119:139–77 [Google Scholar]
  114. Nagin DS, Rebitzer JB, Sanders S, Taylor LJ. 2002. Monitoring, motivation, and management: the determinants of opportunistic behavior in a field experiment. Am. Econ. Rev. 92:4850–73 [Google Scholar]
  115. Neal D, Schanzenbach DW. 2010. Left behind by design: proficiency counts and test-based accountability. Rev. Econ. Stat. 92:2263–83 [Google Scholar]
  116. Noonan KG, Sabel CF, Simon WH. 2009. Legal accountability in the service-based welfare state: lessons from child welfare reform. Law Soc. Inq. 34:3523–68 [Google Scholar]
  117. Oakland JS. 2007. Statistical Process Control Abingdon, UK: Routledge [Google Scholar]
  118. Off. Insp. Gen. 2012. The Social Security Administration's review of administrative law judges' decisions Rep. A-07- 12- 21234 Soc. Secur. Adm Baltimore, MD: [Google Scholar]
  119. Olken BA. 2007. Monitoring corruption: evidence from a field experiment in Indonesia. J. Political Econ. 115:2200–49 [Google Scholar]
  120. Osborne D, Gaebler T. 1993. Reinventing Government: How the Entrepreneurial Spirit Is Transforming the Public Sector New York: Plume [Google Scholar]
  121. Parrillo NR. 2013. Against the Profit Motive: The Salary Revolution in American Government, 1780–1940 New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  122. Pattanayak SK, Yang J-C, Dickinson KL, Poulos C, Patil SR. et al. 2009. Shame or subsidy revisited: social mobilization for sanitation in Orissa, India. Bull. World Health Organ. 87:8580–87 [Google Scholar]
  123. Perez T, Rushing R. 2007. The CitiStat model: how data-driven government can increase efficiency & effectiveness Rep., Cent. Am. Prog Washington, DC: [Google Scholar]
  124. Peterson ED, DeLong ER, Jollis JG, Muhlbaier LH, Mark DB. 1998. The effects of New York's bypass surgery provider profiling on access to care and patient outcomes in the elderly. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 32:4993–99 [Google Scholar]
  125. Pierce L, Snow DC, McAfee A. 2015. Cleaning house: the impact of information technology monitoring on employee theft and productivity. Manag. Sci. 61:102299–319 [Google Scholar]
  126. Propper C, Sutton M, Whitnall C, Windmeijer F. 2010. Incentives and targets in hospital care: evidence from a natural experiment. J. Public Econ. 94:3318–35 [Google Scholar]
  127. Radin BA. 2006. Challenging the Performance Movement: Accountability, Complexity, and Democratic Values Washington, DC: Georgetown Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  128. Ramji-Nogales J, Schoenholtz AI, Schrag PG. 2007. Refugee roulette: disparities in asylum adjudication. Stanford Law Rev 60:295–411 [Google Scholar]
  129. Ray GK, Lubbers JS. 2014. A government success story: how data analysis by the Social Security Appeals Council (with a push from the Administrative Conference of the United States) is transforming social security disability adjudication. George Wash. Law Rev. 83:1575–608 [Google Scholar]
  130. Reback R. 2008. Teaching to the rating: school accountability and the distribution of student achievement. J. Public Econ. 92:51394–415 [Google Scholar]
  131. Rockoff JE, Staiger DO, Kane TJ, Taylor ES. 2012. Information and employee evaluation: evidence from a randomized intervention in public schools. Am. Econ. Rev. 102:73184–213 [Google Scholar]
  132. Roski J, Jeddeloh R, An L, Lando H, Hannan P. et al. 2003. The impact of financial incentives and a patient registry on preventive care quality: increasing provider adherence to evidence-based smoking cessation practice guidelines. Prev. Med. 36:3291–99 [Google Scholar]
  133. Sabel CF, Simon WH. 2017. The management side of due process in the service-based welfare state. Administrative Law from the Inside Out: Essays on Themes in the Work of Jerry L. Mashaw NR Parillo 63–86 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  134. Schneider EC, Epstein AM. 1998. Use of public performance reports: a survey of patients undergoing cardiac surgery. JAMA 279:201638–42 [Google Scholar]
  135. Schochet PZ, Fortson J. 2012. Do regression-adjusted performance measures for workforce development programs track longer-term program impacts? A case study for job corps Work. Pap., Math. Policy Res. [Google Scholar]
  136. Schwartz JC. 2010. Myths and mechanics of deterrence. UCLA Law Rev 57:1023–94 [Google Scholar]
  137. Schwellnus H, Carnahan H. 2014. Peer-coaching with health care professionals: What is the current status of the literature and what are the key components necessary in peer-coaching? A scoping review. Med. Teach 36138–46 [Google Scholar]
  138. Scott A, Sivey P, Ait Ouakrim D, Willenberg L, Naccarella L. et al. 2011. The effect of financial incentives on the quality of health care provided by primary care physicians. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 9:9CD008451 [Google Scholar]
  139. Secomb J. 2008. A systematic review of peer teaching and learning in clinical education. J. Clin. Nurs. 17:6703–16 [Google Scholar]
  140. Shekelle P, Lim Y-W, Mattke S, Damberg C. 2008. Does public release of performance results improve quality of care Syst. Rev. Health Found Lond.: [Google Scholar]
  141. Song H, Tucker AL, Murrell KL, Vinson DR. 2015. Public relative performance feedback in complex service systems: improving productivity through the adoption of best practices Res. Pap. Ser 16–043 Harvard Bus. School, Harvard Univ Boston, MA: [Google Scholar]
  142. Spence GB, Grant AM. 2007. Professional and peer life coaching and the enhancement of goal striving and well-being: an exploratory study. J. Posit. Psychol. 2:3185–94 [Google Scholar]
  143. Springer MG, Ballou D, Hamilton L, Le V-N, Lockwood JR. et al. 2011. Teacher pay for performance: experimental evidence from the Project on Incentives in Teaching (POINT) Rep., Soc. Res. Educ. Eff Evanston, IL: [Google Scholar]
  144. Staats BR, Dai H, Hofmann D, Milkman KL. 2016. Motivating process compliance through individual electronic monitoring: an empirical examination of hand hygiene in healthcare. Manag. Sci. 63:1563–85 [Google Scholar]
  145. Stajkovic AD, Luthans F. 2003. Behavioral management and task performance in organizations: conceptual background, meta-analysis, and test of alternative models. Pers. Psychol. 56:1155–94 [Google Scholar]
  146. Sue-Chan C, Latham GP. 2004. The relative effectiveness of external, peer, and self-coaches. Appl. Psychol. 53:2260–78 [Google Scholar]
  147. Svensson J, Björkman M. 2009. Power to the people: evidence from a randomized field experiment of a community-based monitoring project in Uganda. Q. J. Econ. 124:2735–69 [Google Scholar]
  148. Thaler RH, Sunstein CR. 2008. Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  149. US Food Drug Adm. 2015. Standardization of retail food safety inspection personnel Regul., US Food Drug Adm Silver Spring, MD: https://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceRegulation/RetailFoodProtection/Standardization/default.htm [Google Scholar]
  150. Weber M. 1968. Economy & Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology 3 New York: Bedminister [Google Scholar]
  151. Weibel A, Rost K, Osterloh M. 2010. Pay for performance in the public sector—benefits and (hidden) costs. J. Public Adm. Res. Theory. 20:2387–412 [Google Scholar]
  152. Wilson JQ. 1989. Bureaucracy: What Government Agencies Do and Why They Do It New York: Basic Books [Google Scholar]
  153. Yang CS. 2014. Have interjudge sentencing disparities increased in an advisory guidelines regime-evidence from Booker. N.Y. Univ. Law Rev. 89:1268–342 [Google Scholar]
  154. Yu T-C, Wilson NC, Singh PP, Lemanu DP, Hawken SJ, Hill AG. 2011. Medical students-as-teachers: a systematic review of peer-assisted teaching during medical school. Adv. Med. Educ. Pract 2157–72 [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error