Comparing Government Performance Indicators: A Fuzzy-set Analysis*
Received: Jan 26, 2019; Revised: Feb 15, 2019; Revised: Apr 17, 2019; Accepted: Apr 19, 2019
Published Online: Aug 31, 2019
Abstract
National governments rely on global performance indicators to measure where they stand and to build future strategies. However, no previous study has compiled various indices to investigate pathways to government performance. We use fuzzy-set analysis to investigate what role each of five determinants of government performance—trait competitiveness, change-oriented citizenship behavior, public service motivation, organizational identification, and corruption tolerance—play in three representative government performance indicators—“Government Effectiveness”, “Government Efficiency”, and “Throughput”. The results indicate that government performance as measured by these three indicators is commonly tied to strongly public-service-motivated employees. These three indicators are distinguished from one another with regard to the number of factors that contribute to the construction of sufficient configurations, the role of innovation-inclined factors, and the role of corruption tolerance.
Metrics
QR Code of this Article:
Related Articles
Fiscal Decentralization and Local Government Performance: Decentralized Taxation and Expenditure in Korean Local Governments
J. Policy Stud. 2022;37(1):45-64.
Current Themes in Performance Measurement and Emerging Challenges of the Government Performance and Results Act in the United States
Korean J. Policy Stud. 2006;21(1):27-41.
The moderating effect of digital literacy on the link between e-government effectiveness and trust in government
J. Policy Stud. 2024;39(4):77-101.
Moving Luther Gulick to Asia: Span of Control and Performance in Korean Quasi-Governmental Organizations
J. Policy Stud. 2022;37(2):13-26.
The Conceptualization of the Performance Elements of Media Organizations and the Factors that Influence their Performance
Korean J. Policy Stud. 2016;31(3):27-45.