Lægreid, Per, Paul G. Roness & Kristin Rubecksen (2007):
Modern Management Tools in State Agencies: The Case of Norway
International Public Management Journal Volume 10, Issue 4, 2007
Please note: This page may contain data in Norwegian that is not translated to English.
Type of publication:
Tidsskriftsartikkel
Link to publication:
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10967490701683586
Link to review:
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10967490701683586
Comment:
Jf. Spørreundersøkelse om statlig autonomi; se også
- Dokumenatsjon:
http://www.nsd.uib.no/polsys/index.cfm?urlname=forvaltning&lan=&institusjonsnr=4&arkivnr=24&MenuItem=N1_4&ChildItem=&State=collapse
- Spørreskjema m/følgebrev:
http://www.nsd.uib.no/polsys/StatiskeDokument/SpSkjemaForvAuto2004.html
Number of pages:
26
ISSN:
1096-7494
Language of publication:
Engelsk
Country of publication:
Norge
NSD-reference:
3040
This page was last updated:
19/5 2014
Affiliations related to this publication:
- Sentraladministrative organ (direktorat m.m.)
- Forvaltningsorgan med særskilte fullmakter
- Forvaltningsbedrift
- Andre ordinære forvaltningsorgan
- Finansieringsinstitusjon
Summary:
This article focuses on the broad package of modern management tools that are used by Norwegian state agencies. These tools are regarded as forms of regulation inside government as well as a “shopping basket.” We describe the range of different tools and look at how intensively they are used and how they are interrelated. We also examine variations in use of these tools by different agencies. The empirical basis is a survey addressed to all organizations in the Norwegian civil service, apart from the ministries, in 2004. Our theoretical approach is primarily based on neo-institutional organization theory. Our main empirical findings are that the use of modern management tools is widespread; that some are very common while others are more marginal; that there are different families of tools that supplement each other; that there is significant variation in the use of different tools; and that size is the most important independent variable in explaining the use of different tools. Neo-institutional considerations, particularly normative isomorphism as a source of legitimacy, do not appear to be a major explanation for tool adoption.