Civil service reforms implemented over the past 35 years in many countries around the world have relaxed traditional merit system rules, decentralized the personnel function, and augmented agency and managerial discretion. One objective of these reforms has been to boost government productivity and increase the efficiency of core personnel management functions such as hiring and firing employees, but much of the available evidence suggests that reforms commonly implemented may serve political or ideological objectives better than performance-related goals. We argue for a fuller appreciation of the political motivations for reforms and a broader understanding of their implications.
AdamsJ. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In BerkowitzL. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 267-299). New York: Academic Press.
2.
AlexanderS.RudermanM. (1987). The role of procedural and distributive justice in organizational behavior. Social Justice Research, 1, 177-198.
3.
BarzelayM. (2001). The new public management: Improving research and policy dialogue. Berkeley: University of California Press.
4.
BattaglioR. P.Jr. (2010). Public service reform and motivation: Evidence from an employment at-will environment. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 30, 341-363.
5.
BattaglioR. P.Jr.CondreyS. E. (2009). Reforming public management: Analyzing the impact of public service reform on organizational and managerial trust. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 19, 689-707.
6.
BowmanJ. S. (2010). The success of failure: The paradox of performance pay. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 30, 70-88.
7.
BowmanJ. S.WestJ. P.GertzS. C. (2006). Florida’s Service First: Radical reform in the sunshine state. In KelloughJ. E.NigroL. G. (Eds.), Civil service reform in the states: Personnel policy and politics at the subnational level (pp. 145-170). Albany: State University of New York Press.
8.
BrewerG. A. (2000). Administrative reform and organizational change in the public sector (Democracy Project AP 24/2000). Copenhagen, Denmark: University of Copenhagen.
9.
BrewerG. A. (2001). The great transformation? Administrative and civil service reform in western democracies. In CondreyS. E.MarantoR. (Eds.), Radical reform of the civil service (pp. 43-68). Lexington, MD: Lexington Books.
10.
BrewerG. A.SeldenS. C.FacerR. L.II. (2000). Individual conceptions of public service motivation. Public Administration Review, 60, 204-214.
11.
BrewerG. A.WalkerR. M. (2013). Personnel constraints in public organizations: The impact of reward and punishment on organizational performance. Public Administration Review, 73, 121-131.
12.
BrookD. A.KingC. L. (2007). Civil service reform as national security: The Homeland Security Act of 2002. Public Administration Review, 67, 399-407.
13.
CarrollJ. D. (1995). The rhetoric of reform and political reality in the National Performance Review. Public Administration Review, 55, 302-312.
14.
ChampyJ.HammerM. (1993). Reengineering the corporation. London, England: Nicholas Brealey.
15.
Cleveland v. Loudermill 470 U.S. 532 (1985).
16.
CoggburnJ. D. (2001). Personnel deregulation: Exploring differences in the American states. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 11, 223-244.
17.
CoggburnJ. D. (2006). At-will employment in government: Insights from the state of Texas. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 26, 158-177.
18.
CoggburnJ. D.BattaglioR. P.Jr.BowmanJ. S.CondreyS. E.GoodmanD.WestJ. P. (2010). State government human resource professionals’ commitment to employment at will. The American Review of Public Administration, 40, 189-208.
19.
CondreyS. E.BattaglioR. P.Jr. (2007). A return to spoils? Revisiting radical civil service reform in the United States. Public Administration Review, 67, 425-436.
20.
de MontricherN. (1998). Public sector values and administrative reforms. In PetersB. G.SavoieD. J. (Eds.), Taking stock: Assessing public sector reforms (pp. 108-136). Montreal, Québec, Canada: McGill-Queen’s University Press.
21.
Editorial: Merit in Personnel Reform (1995, December14). Atlanta Journal and Constitution, p. 16
22.
EllingR. C.ThompsonT. L. (2006). Human resource problems and state management performance across two decades: The implications for civil service reform. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 26, 302-334.
23.
FeeneyM. K.RaineyH. G. (2010). Personnel flexibility and red tape in public and nonprofit organizations: Distinctions due to institutional and political accountability. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 20, 801-826.
24.
GoodmanD.MannS. (2010). Reorganization or political smokescreen: The incremental and temporary use of at-will employment in Mississippi state government. Public Personnel Management, 39, 183-209.
25.
GreenbergJ. (1996). The quest for justice on the job. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
26.
HagaB. I.RichmanR.LeavittW. (2010). System failure: Implementing pay for performance in the department of defense’s national security personnel system. Public Personnel Management, 39, 211-230.
27.
HaysS. W.KearneyR. C. (1997). Riding the crest of a wave: The National Performance Review and public management reform. International Journal of Public Administration, 20, 11-40.
28.
HaysS. W.SowaJ. E. (2006). A broader look at the “accountability” movement: Some grim realities in state civil service systems. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 26, 102-117.
29.
HoodC. (1991). A public management for all seasons?Public Administration, 69, 3-20.
30.
JordanT.BattaglioR. P.Jr. (2014). Are we there yet? The state of public human resource management research. Public Personnel Management, 43, 25-57.
31.
KelloughJ. E. (2012). Managing human resources to improve organizational productivity: The role of performance evaluation. In RiccucciN. M. (Ed.), Public personnel management: Current concerns, future challenges (pp. 173-185). New York, NY: Longman.
32.
KelloughJ. E.LuH. (1993). The paradox of merit pay in the public sector: Persistence of a problematic procedure. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 13(2), 45-64.
33.
KelloughJ. E.NigroL. G. (2002). Pay for performance in Georgia state government: Employee perspectives on GeorgiaGain after 5 years. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 22, 146-166.
34.
KelloughJ. E.NigroL. G. (Eds.). (2006). Civil service reform in the states: Personnel policy and politics at the subnational level. Albany: State University of New York Press.
35.
KelloughJ. E.NigroL. G.BrewerG. A. (2010). Civil service reform under George W. Bush: Ideology, politics, and public personnel administration. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 30, 404-422.
36.
KelloughJ. E.SeldenS. C. (1997). Pay-for-performance systems in state government: Perceptions of state agency personnel managers. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 17(1), 5-21.
37.
KelloughJ. E.SeldenS. C. (2003). The reinvention of public personnel administration: An analysis of the diffusion of personnel management reforms in the states. Public Administration Review, 63, 165-176.
38.
KettlD. F. (1997). The global revolution in public management: Driving themes, missing links. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 16, 446-462.
39.
KimJ.KelloughJ. E. (2014). At-will employment in the states: Examining the perceptions of agency personnel directors. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 34, 218-236.
40.
LaneJ. (2000). New public management. London, England: Routledge.
41.
LangbeinL. (2010). Economics, public service motivation, and pay for performance: Complements or substitutes?International Public Management Journal, 13, 9-23.
42.
LasswellH. D. (1936). Politics: Who gets what, when, how. New York, NY: Whittlesey House.
43.
MarkowitzD. L. (1995). The demise of at-will employment and the public employee conundrum. The Urban Lawyer, 27, 305-331.
44.
McGrathR. J. (2013). The rise and fall of radical civil service reform in the U.S. states. Public Administration Review, 73, 638-649.
45.
MilkovichG. T.WigdorA. K. (1991). Pay for performance: Evaluating performance appraisal and merit pay. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
NaffK. C.NewmanM. A. (2004). Federal civil service reform: Another legacy of 9/11?Review of Public Personnel Administration, 24, 191-201.
48.
National Commission on the State and Local Public Service. (1993). Hard truths/tough choices: An agenda for state and local reform. Albany, NY: The Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government.
49.
NigroL. G.KelloughJ. E. (2000). Civil service reform in Georgia: Going to the edge?Review of Public Personnel Administration, 20(4), 41-54.
50.
NigroL. G.KelloughJ. E. (2006). Civil service reform in Georgia: A view from the trenches. In KelloughJ. E.NigroL. G. (Eds.), Civil service reform in the states: Personnel policy and politics at the subnational level (pp. 117-144). Albany: State University of New York Press.
51.
NigroL. G.KelloughJ. E. (2008). Personnel reform in the states: A look at progress fifteen years after the Winter Commission. Public Administration Review, 68(Suppl. s1), S50-S57.
52.
ObolenskyN. (1994). Practical business re-Engineering. London, England: Kogan Page.
53.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (1999). The state of the higher civil service after reform: Britain, Canada and the United States. Paris, France: Author.
54.
PearceJ. L. (1989). Rewarding successful performance. In PerryJ. L. (Ed.), Handbook of public administration (pp. 401-441). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
55.
PearceJ. L.PerryJ. L. (1983). Federal merit pay: A longitudinal analysis. Public Administration Review, 43, 315-325.
56.
PerryJ. L. (1986). Merit pay in the public sector: The case for a failure of theory. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 7, 57-69.
57.
PerryJ. L. (1988-1989). Making policy by trial and error: Merit pay in the federal service. Policy Studies Journal, 17, 389-405.
58.
PerryJ. L.EngbersT. A.JunS. Y. (2009). Back to the future? Performance-related pay, empirical research, and the perils of persistence. Public Administration Review, 69, 39-51.
59.
PerryJ. L.PetrakisB. A.MillerT. K. (1989). Federal merit pay, round II: An analysis of the performance management and recognition system. Public Administration Review, 49, 29-37.
60.
PetersB. G.PierreJ. (2004). Politicization of the civil service in comparative perspective: The quest for control. London, England: Routledge.
61.
PetersT. J.WatermanR. H. (1984). In search of excellence: Lessons from America’s best-run companies. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
62.
PollittC. (1993). Managerialism and the public services (2nd ed.). Cambridge, UK: Basil Blackwell.
63.
PollittC.BouckaertG. (2011). Public management reform: A comparative analysis. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
64.
PollittC.Van ThielS.HomburgV. (2007). New public management in Europe: Adaptation and alternatives. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
65.
RaineyH. G. (1997). The “how much process is due?” debate: Legal and managerial perspectives. In CooperP. J.NewlandC. A. (Eds.), Handbook of public law and administration. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
66.
RiccucciN. M.ThompsonF. J. (2008). The new public management, homeland security, and the politics of civil service reform. Public Administration Review, 68, 877-890.
67.
RusawC. (2009). Professionalism under the “performance-based pay” reform: A critical assessment and alternative development model. Public Personnel Management, 38(4), 35-54.
68.
SchayB. W.SimonsK. C.GuerraE.CaldwellJ. (1992). Broad-banding in the federal government: Technical report. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
69.
SiegelG. B. (1987). The jury is still out on merit pay in government. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 7(3), 3-15.
70.
State of Georgia. (1996). Remarks by Governor Zell Miller (State of the State Address). Atlanta, GA: Office of the Governor.
71.
TessemaM.SoetersJ.NgomaA. (2009). Decentralization of HR functions. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 29, 168-188.
72.
UnderhillJ.OmanR. (2007). A critical review of the sweeping federal civil service changes: The case of the departments of Homeland Security and Defense. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 27, 401-420.
73.
U.S. General Accounting Office. (1984). A 2-year appraisal of merit pay in three agencies. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
74.
WaldoD. (1948). The administrative state. New York, NY: Ronald Press.
75.
WeibelA.RostK.OsterlohM. (2010). Pay for performance in the public sector: Benefits and (hidden) costs. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 20, 387-412.
76.
WestJ. P. (2002). Georgia on the mind of radical civil service reformers. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 22, 79-93.
77.
WestJ. P.BowmanJ. S. (2004). Stakeholder analysis of civil service reform in Florida: A descriptive, instrumental, normative human resource management perspective. State and Local Government Review, 36, 20-34.
78.
WilsonW. (1887). The study of administration. Political Science Quarterly, 2, 197-222.
