是什么影响了国家间基准网络的形成?

IF 2.3 3区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Shuai Cao, Hongtao Yi
{"title":"是什么影响了国家间基准网络的形成?","authors":"Shuai Cao, Hongtao Yi","doi":"10.1111/ropr.12604","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Most studies on public sector benchmarking focus on performance indicators, processes, and outcomes of managed benchmarking. This article, instead, explores the formation of spontaneous interstate benchmarking networks among U.S. state agency leaders. Informed by social comparison theory, we first recategorize benchmarking into best practice benchmarking and competitive benchmarking. Then, we quantify two benchmarking networks with a survey dataset and employ the Exponential Random Graph Model to analyze both endogenous and exogenous factors in the formation of both types of benchmarking networks. We find that the best practice benchmarking network has a popularity effect, while the competitive benchmarking network has mutuality and transitivity effects. Both types of benchmarking networks are more likely to form among states with historical policy diffusion ties and similar economic and geographic characteristics. This study contributes to the literature on public sector benchmarking and network research by exploring the factors that influence the formation of benchmarking networks.","PeriodicalId":47408,"journal":{"name":"Review of Policy Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What shapes the formation of interstate benchmarking networks?\",\"authors\":\"Shuai Cao, Hongtao Yi\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/ropr.12604\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Most studies on public sector benchmarking focus on performance indicators, processes, and outcomes of managed benchmarking. This article, instead, explores the formation of spontaneous interstate benchmarking networks among U.S. state agency leaders. Informed by social comparison theory, we first recategorize benchmarking into best practice benchmarking and competitive benchmarking. Then, we quantify two benchmarking networks with a survey dataset and employ the Exponential Random Graph Model to analyze both endogenous and exogenous factors in the formation of both types of benchmarking networks. We find that the best practice benchmarking network has a popularity effect, while the competitive benchmarking network has mutuality and transitivity effects. Both types of benchmarking networks are more likely to form among states with historical policy diffusion ties and similar economic and geographic characteristics. This study contributes to the literature on public sector benchmarking and network research by exploring the factors that influence the formation of benchmarking networks.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47408,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Review of Policy Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Review of Policy Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/ropr.12604\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of Policy Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ropr.12604","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

大多数关于公共部门基准的研究都集中在绩效指标、过程和管理基准的结果上。本文则探讨了美国州政府机构领导人之间自发形成的州际基准网络。在社会比较理论的指导下,我们首先将标杆管理重新分类为最佳实践标杆管理和竞争性标杆管理。然后,我们利用调查数据集量化了两种标杆网络,并采用指数随机图模型分析了两种标杆网络形成的内生和外生因素。我们发现,最佳实践标杆网络具有流行效应,而竞争标杆网络则具有相互性和传递性效应。这两种类型的基准网络更有可能在具有历史政策传播联系以及类似经济和地理特征的国家之间形成。本研究通过探讨影响基准网络形成的因素,为公共部门基准和网络研究方面的文献做出了贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
What shapes the formation of interstate benchmarking networks?
Most studies on public sector benchmarking focus on performance indicators, processes, and outcomes of managed benchmarking. This article, instead, explores the formation of spontaneous interstate benchmarking networks among U.S. state agency leaders. Informed by social comparison theory, we first recategorize benchmarking into best practice benchmarking and competitive benchmarking. Then, we quantify two benchmarking networks with a survey dataset and employ the Exponential Random Graph Model to analyze both endogenous and exogenous factors in the formation of both types of benchmarking networks. We find that the best practice benchmarking network has a popularity effect, while the competitive benchmarking network has mutuality and transitivity effects. Both types of benchmarking networks are more likely to form among states with historical policy diffusion ties and similar economic and geographic characteristics. This study contributes to the literature on public sector benchmarking and network research by exploring the factors that influence the formation of benchmarking networks.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
23.80%
发文量
57
期刊介绍: The Review of Policy Research (RPR) is an international peer-reviewed journal devoted to the publication of research and analysis examining the politics and policy of science and technology. These may include issues of science policy, environment, resource management, information networks, cultural industries, biotechnology, security and surveillance, privacy, globalization, education, research and innovation, development, intellectual property, health and demographics. The journal encompasses research and analysis on politics and the outcomes and consequences of policy change in domestic and comparative contexts.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信