Keywords
How to Cite
Abstract
This article examines the institutionalization of government effectiveness in the context of public sector reforms, drawing on comparative evidence from OECD countries with focused cases from the United States, the United Kingdom, and Singapore. Using institutional and comparative analysis, the study identifies transferable governance principles, coordination mechanisms, and digital enablers, while highlighting key risks of performance management. The findings offer analytically grounded insights for adapting international experience to national reform contexts.
References
1. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Public Governance Reviews: Public Sector Efficiency and Trust-Based Governance. Paris: OECD Publishing, 2017.
2. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Government at a Glance. Paris: OECD Publishing, selected editions 2019–2023.
3. Kamarck, E. C. Lessons for the Future of Government Reform: The National Performance Review Experience. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press, 2013.
4. United States Congress. Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (Public Law 103–62); GPRA Modernization Act of 2010 (Public Law 111–352). Washington, DC.
5. Hood, C., & Dixon, R. A Government That Worked Better and Cost Less? Evaluating Three Decades of Reform and Change in UK Central Government. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015.
6. World Bank. Worldwide Governance Indicators: Methodology and Analytical Framework. Washington, DC: World Bank, 2020.
7. Civil Service College Singapore. Performance Management and Leadership Development in the Singapore Public Service. Singapore: Civil Service College, analytical reports, 2016–2022.