Administration & Society

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Register here to gain access to SAGE's 500+ Journals Online

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Dehoog, R. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Administration & Society, Vol. 22, No. 3, 317-340 (1990)
DOI: 10.1177/009539979002200303

Competition, Negotiation, or Cooperation

Three Models for Service Contracting

Ruth Hoogland Dehoog

University of North Carolina at Greensboro

Contracting for public services from public or private suppliers is now a common prescription to improve government efficiency. The competitive bidding model is usually viewed as the ideal contracting process. However, this article explains that two other approaches—the negotiation model and the cooperation model-may be more appropriate under certain conditions. The primary factors that are likely to determine which of the three approaches is most suitable are (a) the characteristics of the external environment (especially the number of service suppliers), (b) the level of organizational resources (e.g., personnel, funds, time, and expertise), and (c) the degree of uncertainty about funding, future events, service technologies, and causal relationships between service outputs and desired outcomes. The main point is that there is no one best way to contract for services; rather, government units should adapt their contracting procedures to both internal external conditions to implement service contracting in an effective manner.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Administration & SocietyHome page
J. M. Johnston and B. S. Romzek
Social Welfare Contracts as Networks: The Impact of Network Stability on Management and Performance
Administration Society, April 1, 2008; 40(2): 115 - 146.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Review of Public Personnel AdministrationHome page
S. Fernandez and C. R. Smith
Looking for Evidence of Public Employee Opposition to Privatization: An Empirical Study With Implications for Practice
Review of Public Personnel Administration, December 1, 2006; 26(4): 356 - 381.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector QuarterlyHome page
L. K. Brown and E. Troutt
Funding Relations between Nonprofits and Government: A Positive Example
Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, March 1, 2004; 33(1): 5 - 27.
[Abstract] [PDF]