Comparar métodos
Examine os métodos selecionados lado a lado; as linhas que diferem ficam destacadas.
| Performance-Based Budgeting× | Government Performance Measurement× | |
|---|---|---|
| Área | Public Administration | Public Administration |
| Família | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Ano de origem≠ | 1966 | 2003 |
| Autor original≠ | Allen Schick | Robert D. Behn & Harry P. Hatry |
| Tipo≠ | Budgeting methodology | Performance management framework |
| Fonte seminal≠ | 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 ↗ |
| Outros nomes | PBB, Performance Budgeting, Results-Based Budgeting, Outcome-Based Budgeting | Public Sector Performance Measurement, Government Performance Management, Public Performance Metrics, Agency Performance Measurement |
| Relacionados | 4 | 4 |
| Resumo≠ | Performance-based budgeting is an approach to public budgeting that connects the funds allocated to programs with the results those programs are expected to and actually do deliver. Rather than appropriating money by line items such as salaries and supplies, it organises the budget around programs with stated objectives and performance indicators, so that resource decisions can be informed by what the money buys in terms of outputs and outcomes. Allen Schick's classic 1966 analysis of budget reform traced how budgeting evolved from controlling inputs toward management and planning orientations, of which performance budgeting is a central strand, and the OECD has documented its modern variants across member governments. | 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. |
| ScholarGateConjunto de dados ↗ |
|
|