Government Performance and Chief Executives’ Intangible Assets: Motives, Networking, and/or Capacity?

Abstract

This study explores the impact of chief executives' intangible assets -motives, capacity and networks -on government performance. Three main hypotheses suggesting a direct relationship between these assets and performance are tested using data from municipalities in El Salvador, where the chief executive is the elected mayor. The research involved an in-field survey of 135 Salvadorian mayors (out of 262) and data collected from national agencies, focusing on two dimensions of municipal performance: service delivery (electricity and running water) and expansion of revenue (with national grants). After controlling for municipal and constituent-level factors, findings indicate that the chief executive's capacity (specifically mayoral expertise) is positively correlated to municipal delivery of electricity and running water; intrinsic motivation is linked to expansion of water services; and municipalities whose chief executives are nationally networked tend to receive more grant monies. This study contributes to the literature on government performance by assessing the role of chief executives' intangible assets in the developing context of a relatively newly established democracy in Latin America.Public Management Review, 2015 http://dx.

Women and risk-taking behaviour in local public finance

“…and their memory for representative stimuli from their domain is vastly superior to that of lesser experts, especially for briefly presented stimuli' (Ericsson, Krampe, and Clemens 1993, 365). Experience on a particular task leads chief executives to accumulate (1) wisdom, (2) in-depth knowledge, (3) ability to respond to situations, and (4) group experience, which together constitute expertise (Avellaneda 2016, see also Littlepage, Robison, and Reddington 1997).…”

Subnational Government Performance: Testing Multiple Dimensions of Governors' Experience

“…Experience in years should capture expertise in the public sector. “Expertise leads executives to accumulate wisdom, in‐depth knowledge, the ability to respond to situations and group experience” (Avellaneda , 921; see also Littlepage and Mueller ).…”

Can Administrative Capacity Address Wicked Problems? Evidence From the Frontlines of the American Opioid Crisis

“…Early capacity literature focused on policy adoption rather than the substantive implementation of service delivery (Andrews & Boyne, 2010). However, a growing body of evidence explores the performance impacts of administrative capacity (Andrews & Boyne, 2011; Andrews & Brewer, 2013; Avellaneda, 2016). To date, the link between capacity and performance focuses on outputs measured through a performance appraisal system (but see Wimpy et al, 2018).…”

“…Public management is increasingly concerned with the relationship between capacity and performance (Andrews & Boyne, 2010; Andrews & Brewer, 2013; Avellaneda, 2016; Wimpy, Jackson, & Meier, 2018). The financial and human resources organizations and governments have at their disposal are precious and invaluable to the goals and missions they wish to achieve.…”

“…The financial and human resources organizations and governments have at their disposal are precious and invaluable to the goals and missions they wish to achieve. Although early work in this field linked capacity to policy adoption (Andrews & Boyne, 2010), further studies find that capacity leads to better performance across such disparate contexts as African countries (Wimpy et al, 2018), public school districts in Texas (Meier & O’Toole, 2009), Colombian municipalities (Avellaneda, 2016), and U.K. government agencies (Andrews & Brewer, 2013; Andrews & Boyne, 2010). The literature points to ways in which well-functioning bureaucracies’ matter for performance, yet questions on the topic remain to be explored.…”