Monitoring arrangements for outsourced public services: the importance of service characteristics for the distribution of oversight responsibilities

被引:15
作者
Anguelov, Lachezar G. [1 ]
机构
[1] Evergreen State Coll, Olympia, WA 98505 USA
关键词
Contract oversight; municipal services; monitoring arrangements; PERFORMANCE-MEASUREMENT; GOVERNMENT SERVICES; MANAGEMENT CAPACITY; TRANSACTION COSTS; CONTRACT; STATE; PRIVATIZATION; DECISION; DETERMINANTS; PROVISION;
D O I
10.1080/10967494.2019.1692114
中图分类号
C93 [管理学]; D035 [国家行政管理]; D523 [行政管理]; D63 [国家行政管理];
学科分类号
12 ; 1201 ; 1202 ; 120202 ; 1204 ; 120401 ;
摘要
The research question guiding this article is which factors explain monitoring arrangements for outsourced public services. The article first investigates the independent impact of asset specificity and measurement difficulty on monitoring arrangements for a range of oversight tasks commonly used to hold vendors accountable. Secondly, this study includes high transaction costs as an explanatory variable in models that explain the use of two types of proxy monitoring arrangements as compared to direct government oversight. A unique dataset of outsourced Florida municipal services is analyzed using two-stage Heckman selection models, ordered logistic regression, and multinomial estimation. A key finding indicates that for services where multiple transaction costs characteristics are observed simultaneously (high transaction costs services), oversight arrangements are different. When these services are outsourced, vendors and third-party monitors are more likely to perform certain monitoring tasks when compared to government officials. This research contributes to the vast and expanding literature on local governments' service delivery by outlining how compounding of services' production transaction costs can lead to a complex myriad of oversight strategies.
引用
收藏
页码:252 / 275
页数:24
相关论文
共 46 条
[1]   WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT ON PERCEIVED ACCOUNTABILITY EFFECTIVENESS IN STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS? [J].
Amirkhanyan, Anna A. .
PUBLIC PERFORMANCE & MANAGEMENT REVIEW, 2011, 35 (02) :303-339
[2]   Putting the Pieces Together: A Comprehensive Framework for Understanding the Decision to Contract Out and Contractor Performance [J].
Amirkhanyan, Anna A. ;
Kim, Hyun Joon ;
Lambright, Kristina T. .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION, 2007, 30 (6-7) :699-725
[3]   Collaborative Performance Measurement: Examining and Explaining the Prevalence of Collaboration in State and Local Government Contracts [J].
Amirkhanyan, Anna A. .
JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION RESEARCH AND THEORY, 2009, 19 (03) :523-554
[4]   Regional Cooperation and Multilateral Agreements in the Provision of Public Safety [J].
Andrew, Simon A. ;
Hawkins, Christopher V. .
AMERICAN REVIEW OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION, 2013, 43 (04) :460-475
[5]   Outsourcing Oversight and ARRA 2009: What Factors Explain State Agencies' Decision to Pursue Collaborative Monitoring? [J].
Anguelov, Lachezar G. .
REVIEW OF POLICY RESEARCH, 2016, 33 (02) :160-177
[6]  
Barzelay M., 1996, HDB PUBLIC ADM, P527
[7]   Government contracts and contractor behavior [J].
Berrios, R .
JOURNAL OF BUSINESS ETHICS, 2006, 63 (02) :119-130
[9]   Contracting for management: Assessing management capacity under alternative service delivery arrangements [J].
Brown, T ;
Potoski, M .
JOURNAL OF POLICY ANALYSIS AND MANAGEMENT, 2006, 25 (02) :323-346
[10]   Transaction costs and institutional explanations for government service production decisions [J].
Brown, TL ;
Potoski, M .
JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION RESEARCH AND THEORY, 2003, 13 (04) :441-468