Salīdzināt metodes
Apskatiet izvēlētās metodes blakus; rindas, kas atšķiras, ir izceltas.
| Program Budgeting (PPBS)× | Government Performance Measurement× | |
|---|---|---|
| Nozare | Public Administration | Public Administration |
| Saime | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Izcelsmes gads≠ | 1965 | 2003 |
| Autors≠ | David Novick & RAND Corporation; Allen Schick | Robert D. Behn & Harry P. Hatry |
| Tips≠ | Budgeting and planning system | Performance management framework |
| Pirmavots≠ | Schick, A. (1966). The Road to PPB: The Stages of Budget Reform. Public Administration Review, 26(4), 243–258. DOI ↗ | Behn, R. D. (2003). Why Measure Performance? Different Purposes Require Different Measures. Public Administration Review, 63(5), 586–606. DOI ↗ |
| Citi nosaukumi | PPBS, Planning-Programming-Budgeting System, Program Budgeting, Programme Budgeting | Public Sector Performance Measurement, Government Performance Management, Public Performance Metrics, Agency Performance Measurement |
| Saistītās | 4 | 4 |
| Kopsavilkums≠ | Program budgeting, formalised as the Planning-Programming-Budgeting System (PPBS), structures the budget around the government's objectives and the programs that serve them rather than around organisational units or input line items. It couples that program structure with systematic analysis of alternative ways to achieve each objective, multi-year cost projections, and cost-effectiveness comparison. Developed at the RAND Corporation and set out in David Novick's 1965 edited volume, it was adopted across the U.S. federal government under Defense Secretary Robert McNamara and President Johnson. Allen Schick's 1966 essay 'The Road to PPB' placed it as the culmination of budgeting's evolution toward a planning orientation. | Government performance measurement is the systematic, ongoing collection of quantitative and qualitative indicators about what public agencies put in, do, and achieve. Rather than treating measurement as a single number that grades an agency, the discipline — crystallised by Robert Behn's argument that different managerial purposes require different measures — asks first what a measure is for: evaluating, controlling, budgeting, motivating, promoting, celebrating, learning or improving. It draws heavily on Harry Hatry's practical handbook tradition of distinguishing inputs, outputs and outcomes and building measurement into routine operations. The output is not a verdict but a feedback system that ties day-to-day activity to public results. |
| ScholarGateDatu kopa ↗ |
|
|