Performance management regimes significantly influence public management practice and policy implementation. Yet, within public administration scholarship, there is insufficient attention to how regimes are reified through policy implementation or how they influence management decisions and outcomes. In this analysis, we considered the robustness of policy regime theory to deepen our understanding of performance management. We examine an empirical setting where two competing performance regimes seek to shape local program delivery in social welfare. We use this case to expand regime theory by highlighting the significant role of local managers in interpreting conflicting regime signals. Their interpretation directly shapes operational practices. The analysis highlights that further theorizing about policy regimes should consider various levels within implementation system, particularly the significance of managerial authority.
Bibliographical noteFunding Information:
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research was supported by the Family Self-Sufficiency Research Consortium, Grant Number 90PD0273, funded by the Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation in the Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The contents of this publication are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of the Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, the Administration for Children and Families, or the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
© The Author(s) 2018.
Copyright 2019 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
- intergovernmental relations
- performance management
- policy field
- policy implementation
- regime theory