{"title":"行政改革中的实质与象征:以人力服务协调为例。","authors":"J A Weiss","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In recent years the most popular strategy of reform in the human services arena has been to foster coordination among agencies serving the same populations. The certainty of difficulties in implementing coordination programs and the uncertainty of achieving improvements in service delivery have not dimmed the enthusiasm among policymakers for these programs. This persistent popularity seems to be rooted in the strong symbolic appeal of \"coordination,\" which has overridden attention to evidence about performance.</p>","PeriodicalId":76931,"journal":{"name":"Policy analysis","volume":"7 1","pages":"21-45"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1981-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Substance vs. symbol in administrative reform: the case of human services coordination.\",\"authors\":\"J A Weiss\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In recent years the most popular strategy of reform in the human services arena has been to foster coordination among agencies serving the same populations. The certainty of difficulties in implementing coordination programs and the uncertainty of achieving improvements in service delivery have not dimmed the enthusiasm among policymakers for these programs. This persistent popularity seems to be rooted in the strong symbolic appeal of \\\"coordination,\\\" which has overridden attention to evidence about performance.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":76931,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Policy analysis\",\"volume\":\"7 1\",\"pages\":\"21-45\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1981-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Policy analysis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Policy analysis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Substance vs. symbol in administrative reform: the case of human services coordination.
In recent years the most popular strategy of reform in the human services arena has been to foster coordination among agencies serving the same populations. The certainty of difficulties in implementing coordination programs and the uncertainty of achieving improvements in service delivery have not dimmed the enthusiasm among policymakers for these programs. This persistent popularity seems to be rooted in the strong symbolic appeal of "coordination," which has overridden attention to evidence about performance.