Organizational size and public service performance: a meta-analysis and an agenda for future research

References

• Abner, G. B., S. Y. Kim and J. L. Perry. (2017). Building evidence from public human resource management: Using middle range theory to link theory and data. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 37(2), 945 139–159. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X17697248
   Google Scholar
• Aldrich, H. E. (1972). Technology and organizational structure: A reexamination of the findings of the Aston Group. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17, 26–43. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392089
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Amirkhanyan, A. A., Kim, H. J., & Lambright, K. T. (2010). Do relationships matter? Assessing the association between relationship design and contractor performance. Public Performance & Management Review, 34(2), 189–220.*. https://doi.org/10.2753/PMR1530-9576340203
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andersen, L. B., Boesen, A., & Pedersen, L. H. (2016). Performance in public organizations: Clarifying the conceptual space. Public Administration Review, 76, 852–862. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12578
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andrews, R. (2009). Organizational task environments and performance: An empirical analysis. International Public Management Journal, 12, 1–23.*. https://doi.org/10.1080/10967490802646813
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andrews, R., & Boyne, G. A. (2010). Capacity, leadership and organizational performance: Testing the black box model of public management. Public Administration Review, 70(3), 443–454.*. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2010.02158.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andrews, R., & Boyne, G. A. (2011). Corporate capacity and public service performance. Public Administration, 89(3), 894–908.*. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2010.01891.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andrews, R., Boyne, G. A., Law, J., & Walker, R. M. (2005). External constraints on local service standards: The case of comprehensive performance assessment in English local government. Public Administration, 83(3), 639–656.*. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0033-3298.2005.00466.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andrews, R., Boyne, G. A., Law, J., & Walker, R. M. (2009a). Centralization, organizational strategy, and public service performance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 19(1), 57–80.*. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mum039
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andrews, R., Boyne, G. A., Law, J., & Walker, R. M. (2009b). Strategy formulation, strategy content and performance: An empirical analysis. Public Management Review, 11(1), 1–22.*. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719030802489989
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andrews, R., Boyne, G. A., Law, J., & Walker, R. M. (2011). Strategy implementation and public service performance. Administration & Society, 43(6), 643–671.*. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399711412730
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andrews, R., Boyne, G. A., Meier, K. J., O’toole, L. J., Jr., & Walker, R. M. (2012). Vertical strategic alignment and public service performance. Public Administration, 90(1), 77–98.*. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2011.01938.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andrews, R., Boyne, G., & Mostafa, A. S. M. (2017). When bureaucracy matters for organizational performance: The benefits of administrative intensity in big and complex organizations. Public Administration, 95(1), 115–139. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12305
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andrews, R., Boyne, G. A., O’toole, L. J., Meier, K. J., & Walker, R. M. (2013). Managing migration? EU enlargement, local government capacity and performance in England. Public Administration, 91(1), 174–194.*. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2012.02043.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andrews, R., Cowell, R. J., & Downe, J. (2008). Support for active citizenship and public service performance: An empirical analysis of English local authorities. Policy & Politics, 36(2), 225–243.*. https://doi.org/10.1332/030557308783995044
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andrews, R., & Van de Walle, S. (2013). New public management and citizens’ perceptions of local service efficiency, responsiveness, equity and effectiveness. Public Management Review, 15(5), 762–783.*. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2012.725757
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Askim, J., Klausen, J. E., Vabo, S. I., & Bjurstrøm, K. (2017). Territorial upscaling of local governments: A variable-oriented approach to explaining variance among Western European countries. Local Government Studies, 43, 555–576. https://doi.org/10.1080/03003930.2017.1310102
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Avellaneda, C. N. (2008). Municipal performance: Does mayoral quality matter? Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 19(2), 285–312.*. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mun001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Avellaneda, C. N., & Gomes, R. C. (2015). Is small beautiful? Testing the direct and nonlinear effects of size on municipal performance. Public Administration Review, 75, 137–149. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12307
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Badri, M. A., Davis, D., & Davis, D. (2000). Operations strategy, environmental uncertainty and performance: A path analytic model of industries in developing countries. Omega, 28, 155–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-0483(99)00041-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beck, T., Demirgüç-Kunt, A. S. L. I., & Maksimovic, V. (2005). Financial and legal constraints to growth: Does firm size matter? The Journal of Finance, 60, 137–177. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.2005.00727.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bernerth, J. B., & Aguinis, H. (2016). A critical review and best‐practice recommendations for control variable usage. Personnel Psychology, 69, 229–283. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12103
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beyer, J. M., & Trice, H. M. (1979). A reexamination of the relations between size and various components of organizational complexity. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24, 48–64. https://doi.org/10.2307/2989875
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bidwell, C. E., & Kasarda, J. D. (1985). The Organization and its ecosystem: A theory of structuring in organizations. JAI press.
   Google Scholar
• Black, D. A., Noel, B. G., & Wang, Z. (1999). On-the-job training, establishment size and firm size: Evidence for economies of scale in the production of human capital. Southern Economic Journal, 1(1), 82–100. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2325-8012.1999.tb00225.x
   Google Scholar
• Blau, P. M. (1970). A formal theory of differentiation in organizations. American Sociological Review, 35, 201–218. https://doi.org/10.2307/2093199
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blau, P. M. (1972). Interdependence and hierarchy in organizations. Social Science Research, 1, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/0049-089X(72)90055-5
   Google Scholar
• Blom-Hansen, J., Houlberg, K., Serritzlew, S., & Treisman, D. (2016). Jurisdiction size and local government policy expenditure: Assessing the effect of municipal amalgamation. The American Political Science Review, 110, 812–831. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055416000320
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bohte, J. (2004). Examining the impact of charter schools on performance in traditional public schools. Policy Studies Journal, 32(4), 501–520.*. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.2004.00078.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bohte, J., & Meier, K. J. (2001). Structure and the performance of public organizations: Task difficulty and span of control. Public Organization Review, 1(3), 341–354.*. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012284830077
   Google Scholar
• Borst, R. T., Kruyen, P. M., Lako, C. J., & de Vries, M. S. (2020). The attitudinal, behavioral, and performance outcomes of work engagement: A comparative meta-analysis across the public, semipublic, and private sector. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 40, 613–640. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X19840399
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boyne, G. A. (1996). Scale, performance and the New Public Management: An empirical analysis of local authority services. Journal of Management Studies, 33, 809–826. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.1996.tb00173.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boyne, G. A. (1998). Public choice theory and local government: A comparative analysis of the UK and the USA. Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Boyne, G. A. (2002). Theme: Local government: Concepts and indicators of local authority performance: An evaluation of the statutory frameworks in England and Wales. Public Money & Management, 22, 17–24. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9302.00303
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boyne, G. A. (2003). Sources of public service improvement: A critical review and research agenda. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 13, 367–394. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mug027
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boyne, G. A., & Meier, K. J. (2013). Burdened by bureaucracy? Determinants of administrative intensity in public organizations. International Public Management Journal, 16(2), 307–327. https://doi.org/10.1080/10967494.2013.817261
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brewer, G. A. (2005). In the eye of the storm: Frontline supervisors and federal agency performance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15(4), 505–527.*. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mui031
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brewer, G. A., & Walker, R. M. (2013). Personnel constraints in public organizations: The impact of reward and punishment on organizational performance. Public Administration Review, 73(1), 121–131.*. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2012.02681.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caplow, T. (1957). Organizational size. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1, 484–505. https://doi.org/10.2307/2390870
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carmeli, A. (2006). The managerial skills of the top management team and the performance of municipal organisations. Local Government Studies, 32(2), 153–176.*. https://doi.org/10.1080/03003930600586159
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Charbonneau, É., & Van Ryzin, G. G. (2012). Performance measures and parental satisfaction with New York City schools. The American Review of Public Administration, 42(1), 54–65.*. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074010397333
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Child, J. (1972). Organizational structure, environment and performance: The role of strategic choice. Sociology, 6, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/003803857200600101
   Google Scholar
• Cho, C. L., Kelleher, C. A., Wright, D. S., & Yackee, S. W. (2005). Translating national policy objectives into local achievements across planes of governance and among multiple actors: Second-order devolution and welfare reform implementation. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15(1), 31–54.*. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mui002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chun, Y. H., & Rainey, H. G. (2005). Goal ambiguity and organizational performance in US federal agencies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15(4), 529–557*. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mui030
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Colegrave, A. D., & Giles, M. J. (2008). School cost functions: A meta-regression analysis. Economics of Education Review, 27, 688–696. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2007.05.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dahl, R. A., & Tufte, E. R. (1973). Size and democracy. Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dalton, D. R., Todor, W. D., Spendoloni, M. J., Fielding, G. J., & Porter, L. W. (1980). Organizational Structure & Performance: A Critical Review. Academy of Management Review, 5, 49–64. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1980.4288881
   Google Scholar
• Damanpour, F. (1993). Organizational size and innovation. Organization Studies, 13(3), 375–402. https://doi.org/10.1177/017084069201300304
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis, T. J., & Gabris, G. T. (2008). Strategic compensation utilizing efficiency wages in the public sector to achieve desirable organizational outcomes. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 28(4), 327–348.*. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X08322872
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Denters, B., Goldsmith, M., Ladner, A., Mouritzen, P. E., Rose, L., & Lawrence, E. (2014). Size and local democracy. Edward Elgar Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Ding, F., Lu, J., & Riccucci, N. M. (2021). How bureaucratic representation affects public organizational performance: A meta-analysis. Public Administration Review, 81, 1003–1018. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13361
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dollery, B., & Crase, L. (2004). Is bigger local government better? An evaluation of the case for Australian municipal amalgamation programs. Urban Policy and Research, 22, 265–275. https://doi.org/10.1080/0811114042000269290
   Google Scholar
• Dollery, B., Kitchen, H., McMillan, M., & Shah, A. (2020). Structural reform: Municipal mergers. In B. Dollery, H. Kitchen, M. McMillan, & A. Shah (Eds.), Local public, fiscal and financial governance (pp. 231–255). Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Donaldson, L. (2001). The contingency theory of organizations. Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Drew, J., Razin, E., & Andrews, R. (2019). Rhetoric in municipal amalgamations: A comparative analysis. Local Government Studies, 45, 748–767. https://doi.org/10.1080/03003930.2018.1530657
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Faulk, D. G., & Hicks, M. J. (2011). Local government consolidation in the United States. Cambria Press.
   Google Scholar
• Favero, N., & Meier, K. J. (2013). Evaluating urban public schools: Parents, teachers, and state assessments. Public Administration Review, 73(3), 401–412.*. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12022
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feiock, R. C., Carr, J. B., & Johnson, L. S. (2006). Structuring the debate on consolidation: A response to Leland and Thurmaier. Public Administration Review, 66, 274–278. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00579.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feiock, R. C., & Kalan, L. G. (2001). Assessing the performance of solid waste recycling programs over time. The American Review of Public Administration, 31(1), 22–32.*. https://doi.org/10.1177/02750740122064811
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fesler, J. (1949). Area and administration. University of Alabama Press.
   Google Scholar
• Field, A. P., & Gillett, R. (2010). How to do a meta‐analysis. The British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 63, 665–694. https://doi.org/10.1348/000711010X502733
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flynn, A., & Davis, P. (2016). The policy–practice divide and SME-friendly public procurement. Environment and Planning C Government & Policy, 34, 559–578. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263774X15614667
   Google Scholar
• Fox, W. F., & Gurley, T. (2006). Will consolidation improve sub-national governments? World Bank Working Paper, 3913.
   Google Scholar
• Franco, A., Malhotra, N., & Simonovits, G. (2014). Publication bias in the social sciences: Unlocking the file drawer. Science, 345, 1502–1505. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1255484
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gazley, B., Chang, W. K., & Bingham, L. B. (2010). Board diversity, stakeholder representation, and collaborative performance in community mediation centers. Public Administration Review, 70(4), 610–620.*. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2010.02182.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gendźwiłł, A., Kurniewicz, A., & Swianiewicz, P. (2021). The impact of municipal territorial reforms on the economic performance of local governments. A systematic review of quasi-experimental studies. Space and Polity, 25(1), 37–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562576.2020.1747420
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• George, B., & Pandey, S. K. (2017). We know the yin—but where is the yang? Toward a balanced approach on common source bias in public administration scholarship. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 37, 245–270. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X17698189
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• George, B., Pandey, S. K., Steijn, B., Decramer, A., & Audenaert, M. (2021). Red tape, organizational performance, and employee outcomes: Meta‐analysis, meta‐regression, and research agenda. Public Administration Review, 81, 638–651. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13327
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• George, B., Van de Walle, S., & Hammerschmid, G. (2019). Institutions or contingencies? A cross-country analysis of management tool use by public sector executives. Public Administration Review, 79, 330–342. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13018
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• George, B., Walker, R. M., & Monster, J. (2019). Does strategic planning improve organizational performance? A meta-analysis. Public Administration Review, 79, 810–819. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13104
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gerrish, E. (2016). The impact of performance management on performance in public organizations: A meta-analysis. Public Administration Review, 76, 48–66. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12433
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glass, G. V. (1976). Primary, secondary, and meta-analysis of research. Educational Researcher, 5, 3–8. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X005010003
   Google Scholar
• Goerdel, H. T. (2006). Taking initiative: Proactive management and organizational performance in networked environments. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 16(3), 351–367.*. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mui051
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gooding, R. Z., & Wagner, J. A., III. (1985). A meta-analytic review of the relationship between size and performance: The productivity and efficiency of organizations and their subunits. Administrative Science Quarterly, 30(4), 462–481. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392692
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grosskopf, S., & Yaisawamg, S. (1990). Economies of scope in the provision of local public services. National Tax Journal, 43(1), 61–74. https://doi.org/10.1086/NTJ41788825
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gulati, R., Lavie, D., & Madhavan, R. R. (2011). How do networks matter? The performance effects of interorganizational networks. Research in Organizational Behavior, 31, 207–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2011.09.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gutierrez-Romero, R., Haubrich, D., & McLean, I. (2008). The limits of performance assessments of public bodies: External constraints in English local government. Environment and Planning C-Government and Policy, 26(4), 767–787.*. https://doi.org/10.1068/c0661
   Google Scholar
• Hall, R. H. (1987). Organizations: Structure, process and outcomes (3rd ed.). Prentice-Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Hedges, L. V., & Vevea, J. L. (1998). Fixed- and random-effects models in meta-analysis. Psychological Methods, 3(4), 486–504. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.3.4.486
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heinrich, C. J., & Lynn, L. E., Jr. (2000). Governance and performance: New perspectives. Georgetown University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Homberg, F., McCarthy, D., & Tabvuma, V. (2015). A meta‐analysis of the relationship between public service motivation and job satisfaction. Public Administration Review, 75, 711–722. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12423
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hood, C. (1991). A public management for all seasons. Public Administration, 69(1), 3–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.1991.tb00779.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. (1990). Methods of meta-analysis. Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Hur, Y. (2013). Racial diversity, is it a blessing to an organization? Examining its organizational consequences in municipal police departments. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 79(1), 149–164.*. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852312467613
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jakobsen, M., & Jensen, R. (2015). Common method bias in public management studies. International Public Management Journal, 18, 3–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/10967494.2014.997906
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jugl, M. (2019). Finding the golden mean: Country size and the performance of national bureaucracies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 29, 118–132. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muy044
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jung, C. S. (2011). Organizational goal ambiguity and performance: Conceptualization, measurement, and relationships. International Public Management Journal, 14(2), 193–217.*. https://doi.org/10.1080/10967494.2011.589760
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jung, C. S. (2013). Navigating a rough terrain of public management: Examining the relationship between organizational size and effectiveness. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 23, 663–686. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mus040
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jung, C. S., & Lee, G. (2016). Organizational climate, leadership, organization size, and aspiration for innovation in government agencies. Public Performance & Management Review, 39, 757–782. https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2015.1137764
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kalleberg, A. L., & Van Buren, M. E. (1996). Is bigger better? Explaining the relationship between organization size and job rewards. American Sociological Review, 61, 47–66. https://doi.org/10.2307/2096406
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keating, M. (1995). Size, efficiency and democracy: Consolidation, fragmentation and public choice. In D. Judge, G. Stoker, & H. Wolman (Eds.), Theories of urban politics (pp. 117–134). Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Kimberly, J. (1976). Organizational size and the structuralist perspective: A review, critique and proposal. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21(4), 571–597. https://doi.org/10.2307/2391717
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knott, J. H., & Payne, A. A. (2004). The impact of state governance structures on management and performance of public organizations: A study of higher education institutions. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 23(1), 13–30.*. https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.10176
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuhlmann, S., & Bouckaert, G. (Eds.). (2016). Local public sector reforms in times of crisis. Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Ladd, H. F. (1992). Population growth, density and the costs of providing public services. Urban Studies, 29, 273–295. https://doi.org/10.1080/00420989220080321
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lago-Peñas, S., & Martinez-Vazquez, J. (Eds.). (2013). The challenge of local government size: Theoretical perspectives, international experience and policy reform. Edward Elgar Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Langbein, L., & Stazyk, E. C. (2013). Vive la différence? The impact of diversity on the turnover intention of public employees and performance of public agencies. International Public Management Journal, 16(4), 465–503.*. https://doi.org/10.1080/10967494.2013.849156
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, J., & Kim, M. (2016). Market-driven technological innovation through acquisitions: The moderating effect of firm size. Journal of Management, 42, 1934–1963. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314535439
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, S. Y., & Whitford, A. B. (2013). Assessing the effects of organizational resources on public agency performance: Evidence from the US federal government. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 23(3), 687–712.*. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mus050
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gotzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Clarke, M., Deveraux, P. J., Kleijnen, J., & Moher, D. (2009). The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: Explanation and elaboration. PLoS Medicine, 6(7), e1000100. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000100
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Light, P. C. (1999). The true size of government. The Brookings Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Ling, Y., Zhao, H., & Baron, R. A. (2007). Influence of founder—CEOs’ personal values on firm performance: Moderating effects of firm age and size†. Journal of Management, 33(5), 673–696. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206307305564
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Löfstedt, R. E., & Vogel, D. (2001). The changing character of regulation: A comparison of Europe and the United States. Risk Analysis, 21, 399–405. https://doi.org/10.1111/0272-4332.213121
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lowndes, V., & Sullivan, H. (2008). How low can you go? Rationales and challenges for neighborhood governance. Public Administration, 86(1), 53–74. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2007.00696.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maguire, E. R. (2003). Organizational structure in American police agencies: Context, complexity, and control. SUNY Press.
   Google Scholar
• Marsden, P. V., Cook, C. R., & Kalleberg, A. L. (1994). Organizational structures: Coordination and control. The American Behavioral Scientist, 37, 911–929. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764294037007005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matt, G. E. (2003). Will it work in Münster? Meta-analysis and the empirical generalization of causal relationships. In R. Schulze, H. Holling, & D. Böhning (Eds.), Meta-analysis: New developments and applications in medical and social sciences (pp. 113–139). Hogrefe and Huber.
   Google Scholar
• Meier, K. J., & O’toole, L. J., Jr. (2013a). I think (I am doing well), therefore I am: Assessing the validity of administrators’ self-assessments of performance. International Public Management Journal, 16(1), 1–27.*. https://doi.org/10.1080/10967494.2013.796253
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meier, K. J., & O’toole, L. J., Jr. (2013b). Subjective organizational performance and measurement error: Common source bias and spurious relationships. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 23, 429–456. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mus057
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meier, K. J., Rutherford, A., & N. C. Avellaneda. Eds. (2017). Comparative public management: Why national, environmental, and organizational context matters. Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Melkers, J., & Willoughby, K. (2005). Models of performance-measurement use in local governments: Understanding budgeting, communication, and lasting effects. Public Administration Review, 65(2), 180–190.*. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2005.00443.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meyer, A. D., Tsui, A. S., & Hinings, C. R. (1993). Configurational approaches to organizational analysis. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 1175–1195. https://doi.org/10.2307/256809
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Milward, H. B., & Provan, K. G. (2000). Governing the hollow state. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10, 359–380. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a024273
   Google Scholar
• Newton, K. (1982). Is small really so beautiful. Is big really so ugly? Size, effectiveness and democracy in local government. Political Studies, 30(2), 190–206. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.1982.tb00532.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nicholson-Crotty, S., Grisom, J. A., & Nicholson-Crotty, J. (2012). Governance and the impact of public employee unions on organizational performance. Public Performance & Management Review, 35(3), 422–448.*. https://doi.org/10.2753/PMR1530-9576350302
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nicholson-Crotty, S., & O’toole, L. J. (2004). Public management and organizational performance: The case of law enforcement agencies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 14(1), 1–18.*. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muh001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nicholson-Crotty, S., Theobald, N. A., & Nicholson-Crotty, J. (2006). Disparate measures: Public managers and performance-measurement strategies. Public Administration Review, 66(1), 101–113.*. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00559.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Niskanen, W. (1971). Bureaucracy and representative government. Aldine.
   Google Scholar
• OECD. (2005). Modernizing government.
   Google Scholar
• Olson, M. (1971). Increasing the incentives for international cooperation. International Organization, 25, 866–874. https://doi.org/10.1017/S002081830001777X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ostrom, E. (1976). Size and performance in a federal system. Publius, 6(2), 33–73. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.pubjof.a038392
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Toole, L. J., Jr., & Meier, K. J. (1999). Modeling the impact of public management: Implications and structural content. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 9(4), 505–526. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a024421
   Google Scholar
• O’Toole, L. J., Jr., & Meier, K. J. (2015). Public management, context, and performance: In quest of a more general theory. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25, 237–256. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muu011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Overman, S., & Van Thiel, S. (2016). Agencification and public sector performance: A systematic comparison in 20 countries. Public Management Review, 18, 611–635. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2015.1028973
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Palmon, O., & Wald, J. K. (2002). Are two heads better than one? The impact of changes in management structure on performance by firm size. Journal of Corporate Finance, 8, 213–226. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0929-1199(01)00042-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perry, J. L. (2012). How can we improve our science to generate more usable knowledge for public professionals? Public Administration Review, 72. 492-482. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2012.02607.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pestoff, V. (2014). Collective action and the sustainability of co-production. Public Management Review, 16, 383–401. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2013.841460
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petruzzelli, A. M., Ardito, L., & Savino, T. (2018). Maturity of knowledge inputs and innovation value: The moderating effect of firm age and size. Journal of Business Research, 86, 190–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.02.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pierce, J. R., & Aguinis, H. (2013). The “Too-Much-of-a-Good-Thing Effect” in management. Journal of Management, 39(2), 313–338. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206311410060
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. -Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pollitt, C. (2006). Performance management in practice: A comparative study of executive agencies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 16, 25–44. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mui045
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pollitt, C., & Bouckaert, G. (2017). Public management reform: A comparative analysis-into the age of austerity (4th ed.). Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Provan, K. G., & Kenis, P. (2008). Modes of network governance: Structure, management and effectiveness. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(2), 229–252. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mum015
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rainey, H. G. (2009). Understanding and managing public organizations (5th ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Raudla, R. R. S., Randma-Liiv, T., & Randma-Liiv, T. (2015). Cutback management literature in the 1970s and 1980s: Taking stock. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 81(3), 433–456. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852314564313
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Real, J. C., Roldán, J. L., & Leal, A. (2014). From entrepreneurial orientation and learning orientation to business performance: Analysing the mediating role of organizational learning and the moderating effects of organizational size. British Journal of Management, 25, 186–208. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8551.2012.00848.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Resh, W. G., & Pitts, D. W. (2013). No solutions, only trade-offs? Evidence about goal conflict in street-level bureaucracies. Public Administration Review, 73(1), 132–142.*. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2012.02623.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ringquist, E. (2013). Meta-analysis for public management and policy. Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Rosenthal, R. (1991). Meta-analytic procedures for social research. Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Rosenthal, R., & DiMatteo, M. R. (2001). Meta-analysis: Recent developments in quantitative methods for literature reviews. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 59–82. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.59
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rushing, W. A. (1967). The effects of industry size and division of labor on administration. Administrative Science Quarterly, 12, 273–295. https://doi.org/10.2307/2391552
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rutherford, A. (2016). Re-examining causes and consequences: Does administrative intensity matter for organizational performance. International Public Management Journal, 19(3), 342–369. https://doi.org/10.1080/10967494.2015.1032459
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salge, T. O., & Vera, A. (2012). Benefiting from public sector innovation: The moderating role of customer and learning orientation. Public Administration Review, 72(4), 550–559.*. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2012.02529.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Selden, S. C., & Sowa, J. E. (2004). Testing a multi-dimensional model of organizational performance: Prospects and problems. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 14(3), 395–416. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muh025
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sharpe, L. J. (1970). Theories and values of local government. Political Studies, 18, 153–174. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.1970.tb00867.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shenkar, O., & Ellis, S. (2022). The rise and fall of structural contingency theory: A theory’s ‘autopsy’. Journal of Management Studies, 59, 782–818. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12772
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simon, H. A. (1996). Sciences of the artificial (3rd ed.). MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Skelcher, C. (2000). Changing images of the state: Overloaded, hollowed-out, congested. Public Policy and Administration, 15, 3–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/095207670001500302
   Google Scholar
• Smith, B. W. (2003). The impact of police officer diversity on police-caused homicides. Policy Studies Journal, 31(2), 147–162.*. https://doi.org/10.1111/1541-0072.t01-1-00009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, K. G., Guthrie, J. P., & Chen, M. J. (2016). Strategy, size and performance. Organization Studies, 10(1), 63–81. https://doi.org/10.1177/017084068901000104
   Google Scholar
• Snyder, C. M. (1998). Why do larger buyers pay lower prices? Intense supplier competition. Economics Letters, 58, 205–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-1765(97)00279-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stigler, G. J. (1958). The economies of scale. The Journal of Law & Economics, 1, 54–71. https://doi.org/10.1086/466541
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tavares, A. F. (2018). Municipal amalgamations and their effects: A literature review. Miscellanea Geographica, 22, 5–15. https://doi.org/10.2478/mgrsd-2018-0005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Theobald, N. A., & Nicholson-Crotty, S. (2005). The many faces of span of control: Organizational structure across multiple goals. Administration & Society, 36(6), 648–660.*. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399704270585
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thompson, J. D. (1967). Organizations in action: Social science bases of administrative theory. McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Tullock, G. (1965). The politics of bureaucracy. Public Affairs Press.
   Google Scholar
• Vaccaro, I. G., Jansen, J. J. P., Van Den Bosch, F. A., & Volberda, H. W. (2012). Management innovation and leadership: The moderating role of organizational size. Journal of Management Studies, 49, 28–51. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2010.00976.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van de Ven, A. H., Gancoand, M., & Hinings, C. R. (2013). Returning to the frontier of contingency theory of organizational and institutional designs. The Academy of Management Annals, 7, 393–440. https://doi.org/10.5465/19416520.2013.774981
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Witteloostuijn, A. (2016). What happened to Popperian falsification? Publishing neutral and negative findings: Moving away from biased publication practices. Cross Cultural & Strategic Management, 23(3), 481–508. https://doi.org/10.1108/CCSM-03-2016-0084
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verhoest, K., Van Thiel, S., Bouckaert, G., Lægreid, P., & Van Thiel, S. (Eds.). (2016). Government agencies: Practices and lessons from 30 countries. Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Walker, R. M. (2014). Internal and external antecedents of process innovation: A review and extension. Public Management Review, 16, 21–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2013.771698
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker, R. M., & Andrews, R. (2015). Local government management and performance: A review of evidence. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25, 101–133. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mut038
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker, R. M., Berry, F. S., & Avellaneda, C. N. (2015). Limits on innovativeness in local government: Examining capacity, complexity and dynamism in organizational task environments. Public Administration, 93(3), 663–683. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12159
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker, R. M., Boyne, G. A., & Brewer, G. A. (Eds). (2010). Public management and performance: Research directions. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Walker, R. M., & Brewer, G. A. (2009). Can management strategy minimize the impact of red tape on organizational performance? Administration & Society, 41(4), 423–448.*. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399709338027
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker, R. M., Jung, C. S., & Boyne, G. A. (2013). Marching to different drummers? The performance effects of alignment between political and managerial perceptions of performance management. Public Administration Review, 73(6), 833–844.*. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12131
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yeung, R. (2009). The effects of fiscal decentralization on the size of government: A meta-analysis. Public Budgeting and Finance, 29, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5850.2009.00940.x
   Google Scholar