@article{HammerschmidLoeffler, author = {Hammerschmid, Gerhard and L{\"o}ffler, Lorenz}, title = {The Implementation of Performance Management in European Central Governments: More a North-South than an East-West Divide}, series = {NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy}, volume = {8}, journal = {NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy}, number = {2}, publisher = {De Gruyter Open}, address = {Berlin}, issn = {1338-4309}, doi = {10.1515/nispa-2015-0008}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:b1570-opus4-17081}, pages = {49 -- 68}, abstract = {This article presents the first country-comparative evidence on the importance and use of performance management in European central governments, based on an executive survey conducted in 17 countries. The data confirm that performance management has made its way into European central governments and continues to constitute a major reform trend. At the organizational level of ministries and agencies we find a consistently strong use of strategic planning, performance appraisal and management objectives, along with only a partial institutionalization of a performance-management logic. Scepticism towards measurement and the difficulty of acting upon performance information are persistent challenges. We also find that performance-management implementation is significantly stronger in agencies and larger organizations, and that it varies strongly between different countries. Implementation is substantially higher in Scandinavian countries and Anglo-Saxon countries than in Continental and Southern European countries, with a rather varied pattern for Central and Eastern European countries. The findings thereby confirm the need for a more context-sensitive understanding of performance management, along with the need for more extensive research and evidence to further develop this cross-comparative European perspective.}, language = {en} } @article{HammerschmidLoefflerHuebneretal., author = {Hammerschmid, Gerhard and L{\"o}ffler, Lorenz and H{\"u}bner, Stefanie and Schuster, Ferdinand}, title = {Kreisgebietsreform in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern - Ein Erfolgsbeispiel f{\"u}r andere?}, series = {Verwaltung und Management}, volume = {21}, journal = {Verwaltung und Management}, number = {4}, publisher = {Nomos}, address = {Baden-Baden}, issn = {0947-9856}, doi = {10.5771/0947-9856-2015-4-182}, pages = {182 -- 191}, abstract = {Der Beitrag analysiert die Kreisgebietsreform in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. {\"A}hnlich wie bei anderen Gebietsreformen der Vergangenheit wurde diese mit zu erwartenden finanziellen „Reformrenditen" begr{\"u}ndet, obwohl die bisherigen Untersuchungen zu solchen Effekten als wenig belastbar erscheinen. Als Ergebnis der Reform in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern lassen sich einzelne Verbesserungen etwa im Bereich Personalentwicklung feststellen, die allerdings deutlich hinter den Erwartungen zur{\"u}ckliegen. Die finanzielle Lage der neu geschaffenen Großkreise hat sich nicht zum Vorteil entwickelt, w{\"a}hrend sich das politische Gewicht der Landr{\"a}te in der Landespolitik erh{\"o}ht hat. Klar feststellbar ist, dass weder eine durchgreifende Funktionalreform noch eine kommunale Gebietsreform unterhalb der Kreisebene in ausreichender Form umgesetzt wurden. Es bleibt Skepsis, ob die neuen Strukturen die Resilienz der Verwaltung gegen{\"u}ber dem demografischen Wandel erh{\"o}hen, auch wenn dies noch nicht abschließend beurteilt werden kann.}, language = {de} } @article{HammerschmidLoefflerCanzler, author = {Hammerschmid, Gerhard and L{\"o}ffler, Lorenz and Canzler, M.}, title = {Herausforderungen der Zukunft eher verwaltungsintern?: Ergebnisse einer bundesweiten Befragung von Verwaltung und Wirtschaft}, series = {Innovative Verwaltung}, volume = {37}, journal = {Innovative Verwaltung}, number = {7-8}, publisher = {Springer Professional}, address = {Wiesbaden}, pages = {28 -- 32}, abstract = {Im Vorfeld des diesj{\"a}hrigen Zukunftskongresses wurden im Rahmen der Studie „Zukunftspanel Staat \& Verwaltung 2015" die gr{\"o}ßten Herausforderungen f{\"u}r den {\"o}ffentlichen Sektor ermittelt. Dazu wurden F{\"u}hrungskr{\"a}fte aus Verwaltungen und aus der Wirtschaft befragt.}, language = {de} } @article{HammerschmidLoefflerKanzler2016, author = {Hammerschmid, Gerhard and L{\"o}ffler, Lorenz and Kanzler, Matthias}, title = {Defizite in der Fl{\"u}chtlingsarbeit als Katalysator f{\"u}r Reformen}, series = {Innovative Verwaltung}, journal = {Innovative Verwaltung}, edition = {9}, pages = {32 -- 35}, year = {2016}, language = {de} } @article{HammerschmidLoeffler, author = {Hammerschmid, Gerhard and L{\"o}ffler, Lorenz}, title = {The Implementation of Performance Management in European Central Governments: More a North-South than an East-West Divide}, series = {NISPACEE Journal of Public Administration and Policy}, volume = {8}, journal = {NISPACEE Journal of Public Administration and Policy}, number = {2}, doi = {10.1515/nispa-2015-0008}, pages = {49 -- 68}, abstract = {This article presents the first country-comparative evidence on the importance and use of performance management in European central governments, based on an executive survey conducted in 17 countries. The data confirm that performance management has made its way into European central governments and continues to constitute a major reform trend. At the organizational level of ministries and agencies we find a consistently strong use of strategic planning, performance appraisal and management objectives, along with only a partial institutionalization of a performance-management logic. Scepticism towards measurement and the difficulty of acting upon performance information are persistent challenges. We also find that performance-management implementation is significantly stronger in agencies and larger organizations, and that it varies strongly between different countries. Implementation is substantially higher in Scandinavian countries and Anglo-Saxon countries than in Continental and Southern European countries, with a rather varied pattern for Central and Eastern European countries. The findings thereby confirm the need for a more context-sensitive understanding of performance management, along with the need for more extensive research and evidence to further develop this cross-comparative European perspective.}, language = {en} } @incollection{HammerschmidFiedlerLoeffler, author = {Hammerschmid, Gerhard and Fiedler, Jobst and L{\"o}ffler, Lorenz}, title = {Germany: An Outlier in Terms of Fiscal Adjustment}, series = {Public Management in Times of Austerity}, booktitle = {Public Management in Times of Austerity}, editor = {Moll, Ghin E.}, publisher = {Routledge}, address = {New York and London}, pages = {53 -- 70}, language = {en} } @article{BachHammerschmidLoeffler, author = {Bach, Tobias and Hammerschmid, Gerhard and L{\"o}ffler, Lorenz}, title = {More delegation, more political control? Politicization of senior-level appointments in 18 European countries}, series = {Policy and Administration}, volume = {1}, journal = {Policy and Administration}, edition = {35}, doi = {10.1177/0952076718776356}, pages = {3 -- 23}, abstract = {This article contributes to the literature on the politicization of appointments to increase political control over public bureaucracies with often substantial managerial and policy autonomy. Using data from a large-scale executive survey from central government ministries and agencies in 18 European countries, the article provides a comprehensive cross-national and cross-organizational analysis of the autonomy-politicization conundrum and the drivers of the politicization of senior-level appointments. We find that national patterns of politicization correspond fairly well to country families as defined by administrative traditions, with some traditions being more coherent than others. At the organizational level, we find no evidence of efforts by politicians to compensate for extended autonomy by politicizing senior-level appointments, yet we provide evidence of differential effects of both formal and informal organizational characteristics on patterns of politicization. Our analyses show that politicization of senior appointments is lower in organizations with agency status, higher organizational social capital, higher financial autonomy and more extensive use of management tools. The article thereby not only offers comprehensive evidence of cross-country differences in politicization; it also adds to the literature on sub-national variation, by fleshing out an organizational perspective to the study of politicized appointments in the European context.}, language = {en} }