@article{Kroll2015,
  author    = {Kroll, Alexander},
  title     = {Explaining the Use of Performance Information by Public Managers: A Planned-Behavior Approach},
  series = {The American review of public administration},
  volume    = {45},
  journal   = {The American review of public administration},
  number    = {2},
  publisher = {Sage Publ.},
  address   = {Thousand Oaks},
  issn      = {0275-0740},
  doi       = {10.1177/0275074013486180},
  pages     = {201 -- 215},
  year      = {2015},
  abstract  = {This article examines the use of performance information by public managers. It reviews literature on the impact of attitudes and social norm and puts forward a psychological-cognitive model based on the theory of planned behavior. The article finds support for this model emphasizing that performance data use is a goal-directed, reasoned action. Another critical result is that managers who consciously intend to use performance data also make sure that the data in their division are of good quality which, in turn, fosters information use. These findings indicate thatin addition to organizational routinescognitive factors are promising starting points for interventions to foster managers' data use. The article is based on survey data from German cities.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{EbingerRichter2016,
  author    = {Ebinger, Falk and Richter, Philipp},
  title     = {Decentralizing for performance? A quantitative assessment of functional reforms in the German Lander},
  series = {International review of administrative sciences : an international journal of comparative public administration},
  volume    = {82},
  journal   = {International review of administrative sciences : an international journal of comparative public administration},
  publisher = {Sage Publ.},
  address   = {London},
  issn      = {0020-8523},
  doi       = {10.1177/0020852315586916},
  pages     = {291 -- 314},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {In the last 10 years, the governments of most of the German L{\"a}nder initiated administrative reforms. All of these ventures included the municipalization of substantial sets of tasks. As elsewhere, governments argue that service delivery by communes is more cost-efficient, effective and responsive. Empirical evidence to back these claims is inconsistent at best: a considerable number of case studies cast doubt on unconditionally positive appraisals. Decentralization effects seem to vary depending on the performance dimension and task considered. However, questions of generalizability arise as these findings have not yet been backed by more 'objective' archival data. We provide empirical evidence on decentralization effects for two different policy fields based on two studies. Thereby, the article presents alternative avenues for research on decentralization effects and matches the theoretical expectations on decentralization effects with more robust results. The analysis confirms that overly positive assertions concerning decentralization effects are only partially warranted. As previous case studies suggested, effects have to be looked at in a much more differentiated way, including starting conditions and distinguishing between the various relevant performance dimensions and policy fields.},
  language  = {en}
}