A Behavioral Design to Reform Italy’s Evaluation Policy

IF 1.1 3区 社会学 Q2 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY American Journal of Evaluation Pub Date : 2021-10-05 DOI:10.1177/1098214020972791
M. Marra
{"title":"A Behavioral Design to Reform Italy’s Evaluation Policy","authors":"M. Marra","doi":"10.1177/1098214020972791","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Drawing on the extensive ethnographic research I conducted on Italy’s performance evaluation system, this article highlights the cognitive biases associated with evidence use in decision making and institution working. Framing effects, status quo bias, motivated reasoning, and tacit conflicts between personal and organizational interests were only some of the behavioral phenomena policy makers, managers, and evaluators showed to limit their exposure to performance information. Integrating behavioral findings with theories of governance, evaluation utilization, and critical evidence–informed policymaking, this article discusses behavioral reform strategies to overcome (i) tacit conflicts of interests among evaluators, (ii) the compliance mentality with performance assessment among managers, and (iii) adversarial relationships between courts and administrative agencies as well as polarized politics with respect to evidence use and experts’ behavior. A behavioral design is relevant to reform evaluation policies, especially in countries where performance regimes have been criticized, contested, resisted, and/or perceived as red tape and surveillance mechanisms.","PeriodicalId":51449,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Evaluation","volume":"42 1","pages":"483 - 504"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Evaluation","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214020972791","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Drawing on the extensive ethnographic research I conducted on Italy’s performance evaluation system, this article highlights the cognitive biases associated with evidence use in decision making and institution working. Framing effects, status quo bias, motivated reasoning, and tacit conflicts between personal and organizational interests were only some of the behavioral phenomena policy makers, managers, and evaluators showed to limit their exposure to performance information. Integrating behavioral findings with theories of governance, evaluation utilization, and critical evidence–informed policymaking, this article discusses behavioral reform strategies to overcome (i) tacit conflicts of interests among evaluators, (ii) the compliance mentality with performance assessment among managers, and (iii) adversarial relationships between courts and administrative agencies as well as polarized politics with respect to evidence use and experts’ behavior. A behavioral design is relevant to reform evaluation policies, especially in countries where performance regimes have been criticized, contested, resisted, and/or perceived as red tape and surveillance mechanisms.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
意大利评估政策改革的行为设计
根据我对意大利绩效评估系统进行的广泛的民族志研究,本文强调了与决策和机构工作中证据使用相关的认知偏见。框架效应、现状偏见、动机推理以及个人和组织利益之间的隐性冲突只是政策制定者、管理者和评估者表现出的限制他们接触绩效信息的一些行为现象。本文将行为研究结果与治理、评估利用和关键证据知情决策理论相结合,讨论了行为改革策略,以克服(i)评估者之间的隐性利益冲突,(ii)管理者对绩效评估的合规心态,三法院和行政机构之间的敌对关系,以及在证据使用和专家行为方面的两极分化的政治。行为设计与改革评估政策相关,尤其是在绩效制度受到批评、质疑、抵制和/或被视为繁文缛节和监督机制的国家。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
American Journal of Evaluation
American Journal of Evaluation SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
11.80%
发文量
39
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Evaluation (AJE) publishes original papers about the methods, theory, practice, and findings of evaluation. The general goal of AJE is to present the best work in and about evaluation, in order to improve the knowledge base and practice of its readers. Because the field of evaluation is diverse, with different intellectual traditions, approaches to practice, and domains of application, the papers published in AJE will reflect this diversity. Nevertheless, preference is given to papers that are likely to be of interest to a wide range of evaluators and that are written to be accessible to most readers.
期刊最新文献
Reflections on the Intersections Between Collaboration and Use in Evaluation Practice The Role of Evaluation Theory and Practice in Narrowing the Research-to-Practice Gap Rich Pictures: A Visual Method for Sensemaking Amid Complexity Book Review: Cost-Inclusive Evaluation: Planning It, Doing It, Using It by Nadini Persaud & Brian T. Yates From the Co-Editors: Being in Relationship with Citizens, Communities, and Clients in Evaluation Practice
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1