Efficient Provision of Employment Service Outputs: A Production Frontier Analysis

Cavin, Edward; Stafford, Frank P.

doi:10.2307/145680

Cited by 17 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition to the c measure of productive efficiency derived from Greene (1980) and Richmond (1974), we employ an efficiency measure suggested by Cavin and Stafford (1985). This is a measure of relative efficiency, indicating the mean difference within each firm beteen actual performance and the best practice point, standardized by the range of the regression residuals, so that the efficiency measure is within the range to,i.i6.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Alternative Compensation Arrangements and Productive Efficiency in Partnerships: Evidence from Medical Group Practice

Gaynor

Pauly

1987

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Alternative Compensation Arrangements and Productive Efficiency in Partnerships: Evidence from Medical Group Practice

Gaynor

Pauly

1987

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…An alternative method for analyzing the performance of public sector programs is to use a production frontier analysis (Lovell, 1993). In these models it is typical to estimate a flexible functional form of a cost function with the relevant components of cost included in the analysis (Cavin & Stafford, 1985). Cavin and Stafford also show that under certain conditions the residual of the cost function is a measure of relative efficiency.…”

Section: Appendix Bmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trading Speed for Accuracy? Managing Goal Conflict and Accommodation in the U.S. Unemployment Insurance Program

Wenger

O’Toole

Meier

2008

Policy Studies Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public managers must often cope with competing and conflicting goals. The common formulation is to assume that managers must trade‐off goals against each other. But is this always true? An alternative hypothesis is that sometimes managers may instead be able to improve outcomes on multiple goals simultaneously—by altering management practices. We test this “trade‐off” notion using a panel of state‐level administrative data from the U.S. unemployment insurance (UI) system from 1997 to 2004 and qualitative interviews from selected states. The trade‐off examined is timeliness of UI benefit payments versus the quality of UI determinations. In general, we find that state administrators often adopt management practices that facilitate improved outcomes for both timeliness and quality, indicating no trade‐off but instead a synergy between outcomes. We also find evidence of a feedback effect linking higher performance on timeliness to better quality determinations.

show abstract

“…To our knowledge there are only a few previous efficiency analyses of employment offices that have used the production frontier approach, or some closely related method. A US study by Cavin and Stafford (1985) included 51 employment offices (state employment services) in the USA during the period 1977 to 1982. In this study, total cost of staff was the only input in the production process.…”

Section: Ijm 262mentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficiency and productivity of employment offices: evidence from Sweden

Althin¹,

Behrenz

2005

International Journal of Manpower

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose -This paper aims to measure the efficiency and productivity of Swedish employment offices. Design/methodology/approach -Using four inputs, five outputs, and two quality attributes the efficiency and productivity of 253 Swedish employment offices are evaluated using models of relative technical efficiency and Malmquist productivity indices. The results are computed as solutions to linear programming problems for the 1992-1995 periods. Findings -Results of the study find that the mean efficiency across offices varies between 74 and 78 percent. The mean productivity change demonstrates a decrease of 11 percent during the 1992-1993 period, and an increase of 7 and 13 percents during 1993-1994 and 1994-1995 respectively. Research limitations/implications -Different background characteristics of job seekers could possibly bias the result for some of the offices. Further research could use a dynamic model where different job seeker characteristics are taken into consideration. Practical implications -The paper provides an opportunity for inefficient/low productivity offices to study how offices identified as more efficient are producing their services. Originality/value -This paper demonstrates how efficiency and productivity could be measured in a multi-input, multi-output employment office service sector setting where quality aspects are allowed to play a part.

show abstract

Efficient Provision of Employment Service Outputs: A Production Frontier Analysis

Cited by 17 publications

References 10 publications

Alternative Compensation Arrangements and Productive Efficiency in Partnerships: Evidence from Medical Group Practice

Alternative Compensation Arrangements and Productive Efficiency in Partnerships: Evidence from Medical Group Practice

Trading Speed for Accuracy? Managing Goal Conflict and Accommodation in the U.S. Unemployment Insurance Program

Efficiency and productivity of employment offices: evidence from Sweden

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About