Evaluating the Effectiveness of Public Works Accreditation on Quality of Service

Abstract

Accreditation of public works departments is a new method of improving quality of service that incorporates best management practices. Using a self-administered survey of 166 public works employees, this study examines the effects of accreditation on the towns of Greeley, Colorado, and Schaumburg, Illinois, currently the only communities to have completed the accreditation process. Results from chisquare tests and correlation coefficients indicated that communication among employees and communication between management and staff are statistically significant factors in the quality of service provided by employees. The other important factor correlated with quality of service was job knowledge that comes from the accreditation process. Findings suggest that benefits from accreditation, such as increased communication and job knowledge, are not captured in traditional performance measures of public works departments. Conclusions suggest that although higher quality of service can be a reason to pursue accreditation, administrators should consider survey techniques to capture its benefits.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Allen, J. R. (1996). The uses of performance measurement in government. Government Finance Review, 12, 11-15.

Ammons, D. N. (1995). Overcoming the inadequacies of performance measurement in local government: The case of libraries and leisure services. Public Administration Review, 55, 37-47.

Berman, E. M. (1997). Dealing with cynical citizens. Public Administration Review, 57, 105-112.

Carnevale, D. G. (1995). Human capital and high performance in public organizations. In S. W. Hays & R. C. Kearney (Eds.), Public personnel administration: Problems and prospects(pp. 133-144). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Edlin, M. (1997). Accreditation: One thumb down for reviewers. Hospitals & Health Networks, 71, 49-50.

Green, R. T. , Keller, L. F. , & Wamsley, G. L. (1993). Reconstituting a profession for American public administration. Public Administration Review, 53, 516-524.

Havighurst, C. C. (1994). The place of private accrediting among the instruments of government. Law and Contemporary Problems, 57, 1-14.

Jacobs, G. (1992). Certification and accreditation law handbook. Washington, DC: American Society of Association of Executives.

Larkin, T. J. , & Larkin, S. (1996) Reaching and changing line employees. Harvard Business Review, 53, 95-104.

10.

Lowi, T. J. (1969). The end of liberalism: The indictment. New York: Norton.

11.

McGregor, D. M. (1960). The human side of enterprise. New York: McGraw-Hill.

12.

Mintzberg, H. (1996). Managing government, governing management. Harvard Business Review, 53, 75-83.

13.

Osborne, D. , & Gaebler, T. (1992). Reinventing government. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

14.

Ross, D. H. (Ed.). (1996). Improving public works operations and management: A guide to self-assessment using the management practices manual. Kansas City, MO: American Public Works Association.

15.

Rourke, F. E. (1979). Bureaucratic autonomy and the public interest. American Behavioral Scientist, 22, 537-546.

16.

Taylor, F. W. (1911). The principles scientific management. New York: Harper.

17.

Terkel, S. (1974). Working. New York: Pantheon.

18.

Thorne, J. D. (Ed.). (1995). Public works management practices(2nd ed.). Kansas City, MO: American PublicWorks Association.

19.

U.S. General Accounting Office . (1991). Management practices: U.S. companies improve performance through quality efforts(Report to the Honorable Donald Ritter, House of Representatives, GAO/NSAID-91-190). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.

20.

U.S. General Accounting Office . (1992). Organizational culture: Techniques companies use to perpetuate or change beliefs and values(Report to the chairman, Committee on Governmental Affairs, U.S. Senate, GAO/NSAID-92-105). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.

21.

West, F. W. (1995). Controlling the bureaucracy: Institutional constraints in theory and practice. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.