Search results

The purpose of this paper is to enhance understanding of the conceptualisation and operationalisation of public value in practice by applying Moore's (1995) strategic triangle as an analytical framework to study strategic management and management control practices in relation to public value.

The paper uses an interpretative longitudinal case study approach including qualitative methods of document studies and interviews between 2017 and 2019.

In the strategic triangle, the three nodes of authorising environment, public value creation and operational capacity are interdependent, and alignment is a necessity for a strategy to be successful. But this alignment is vulnerable. The findings suggest three propositions: (1) strategic alignment is vulnerable to management control practices having a strong focus on performance measurements, (2) strategic alignment is vulnerable to standardised management control practices and (3) strategic alignment is vulnerable to politically driven management control practices.

With the strategic triangle as a base, this paper tries to understand what kind of management control practices enable and/or constrain public value, as there has been a call for this kind of research. In this way it adds to earlier research on public value, to the growing interest in the strategic triangle as an analytical framework in analysing empirical material and to the request for more empirical studies on the subject. The strategic triangle also embraces political factors, government agendas and political leadership for which there has also been a call for more research.

The purpose of this paper is to conceptualise our understanding of public value accounting (PVA) by studying the use and usefulness of performance measurements (PM) as a management tool. The authors do this from a perspective in which they address the complexity of various (sometimes conflicting) assessments of performance measurement and management (PMM) by different stakeholders.

An interpretative case study using qualitative methods. The paper is based on 30 interviews conducted in 2018 and 2019 with respondents working with PMM at different levels, such as politicians, officials and health-care professionals. The study context was Region Stockholm (RS) in Sweden and its health-care division.

PMs become an instrumental tool for PMM, which led to output being promoted above outcome. The authors show that there is a conceptual shortcoming in the discussion of PVA, as the effort needed to achieve outcome-based information might exceed the ability of an organisation to deliver it. The authors address the importance of studying the interaction among different stakeholders, including politicians, the public and media, in research on PVA, as well as possible power relationships among stakeholders.

The authors contribute to the growing research on PVA and its call for more empirical research by offering a more nuanced interpretation of PVA activities. The authors do this by studying PMM and the nature of these activities in a public sector organisation from a multiple-stakeholder perspective.

Student satisfaction is an important indicator of educational quality in higher education institutions. Learning environment factors are assumed to play a role in determining student satisfaction. The purpose of this study is to examine the intrinsic relationships between five learning environment scales embedded within one measure; and examine the associations between each of these scales and an overall measure of education program satisfaction.

In this cross-sectional study, 175 first-year occupational therapy students in Norway completed sociodemographic information and the Course Experience Questionnaire. The data were analyzed with Pearson’s correlation coefficient r and with linear regression.

All intrinsic associations between the learning environment scales were positive. In the adjusted analysis, higher education program satisfaction was significantly associated with higher scores on “clear goals and standards,” “emphasis on independence” and “good teaching.” The final model accounted for 45.0% of the outcome variance, of which the scores on the learning environment scales contributed 41.8%.

The learning environment is vital for student satisfaction. More specifically, efforts to improve student satisfaction may include strengthening student-focused teaching, strengthening the autonomy of the students, and ensuring that the goals and standards of courses are clear and easy to understand.