Budgeters' Views of State Performance-Budgeting Systems: Distinctions across Branches

By J. Melkers, Katherine G. Willoughby. 2001

175 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Management Information Systems, Political Science and International Relations, Public Administration

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/3d2e1410685da516dbb94d255c33124fa8cf83fa

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Management Information Systems

1. R. Behn

In Political Science and International Relations

1. R. Behn

In Public Administration

1. G. Henry
2. M. Mark
3. R. Behn

Citations in the corpus

• The Mechanisms and Outcomes of Evaluation Influence (2004, background): “Melkers and Willoughby (2001) and Willoughby and Melkers (2001) report findings for items related to the influence processes in the executive branch (Steps 1–5 above).”
• The Psychological Barriers to Performance Management (2002, background): “The requirements to include performance data in budget proposals have little effect on the actual budget decisions (Franklin, 1999, p. 203; Melkers & Willoughby, 2001, p. 61; Pollitt, 1999, p. 13).”
• Does Performance Budgeting Work? An Examination of the Office of Management and Budget’s PART Scores (2006, background): “A more recent survey of state budget offi cials by Melkers and Willoughby (2001) indicates that performance budgeting does not have a major impact on how money is allocated.”