“Deliverology” and Evaluation
A Tale of Two Worlds
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.3138/cjpe.53365Keywords:
deliverology, election promises, evaluation, new political governance, results-based managementAbstract
In recent years, the new political governance, a partisan model that contributes to a permanent campaign, gained ground in public organizations. In this new context, “deliverology” is portrayed as an innovative method to help governments implement new policies and deliver on election promises. This article presents the similarities and differences that exist between “deliverology” and evaluation. Is deliverology really something new or is it another case of old wine in a new bottle? Is deliverology a substitute for or, instead, a complement to institutionalized evaluation? To what extent does new political governance (exemplified by deliverology and performance measurement) undermine evidence-based decision making? What is the value-added of deliverology? These questions are addressed through a critical reflection on deliverology and its value-added in Canada, where evaluation became institutionalized in many departments and agencies under the influence of results-based management, promoted by the advocates of new public management over four decades.
References
Arellano, N. (2016a). Can deliverology help solve education, health problems in remote areas? Canadian Government Executive. Retrieved from http://canadiangovernmentexecutive.ca/can-deliverology-help-solve-education-health-problems/
Arellano, N. (2016b). Trudeau’s five deliverology targets . Canadian Government Executive. Retrieved from http://canadiangovernmentexecutive.ca/trudeaus-five-deliverolgy-targets/
Arellano, N. (2016c). Trudeau’s “deliverology” guy. Canadian Government Executive. Retrieved from http://canadiangovernmentexecutive.ca/trudeaus-deliverology-guy/
Arnaboldi, M., Lapsley, I., & Steccolini, I. (2015). Performance management in the public sector: The ultimate challenge. Financial Accountability & Management, 31 (1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/faam.12049
Aubert, B. A., & Bourdeau, S. (2012). Public sector performance and decentralization of decision rights. Canadian Public Administration, 55(4), 575–598. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1754-7121.2012.00238.x
Aucoin, P. (2012 ). “New Political Governance” in Westminster systems: Impartial public administration and management performance at risk. Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration and Institutions, 25(2), 177–199. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0491.2012.01569.x
Auditor General of Canada. (2002). Chapter 6: A model for rating department performance reports. In 2002 April Report of the Auditor General of Canada. Retrieved from https://web.archive.org/web/20190618194158/http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/parl_oag_200204_e_1133.html
Auditor General of Canada. (2004). Chapter 7—Managing government: A study of the role of the Treasury Board and its Secretariat. In 2004 March Report of the Auditor General of Canada. Retrieved from http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/parl_oag_200403_07_e_14899.html#ch7hd4b
Auditor General of Canada. (2005). Chapter 5: Rating selected department performance reports. In 2005 Report of the Auditor General of Canada. Retrieved from http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/parl_oag_200504_05_e_14936.html
Auditor General of Canada. (2017, November 21). Auditor General’s opening statement—2017 Fall reports press conference. Retrieved from http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/osm_20171121_e_42705.html
Ayers, R. S. (2013). Building goal alignment in federal agencies’ performance appraisal programs. Public Personnel Management, 42(4), 495–520. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091026013496077
Barber, M. (2008). An instruction to deliver: Tony Blair, the public services and the challenge of delivery. London, England: Politicos. Barber, M. (2013). The good news from Pakistan. Retrieved from https://web.archive.org/web/20180823130848/http://www.reform.uk/publication/the-good-news-from-pakistan/
Barber, M. (2016). How to run a government so that citizens benefit and taxpayers don’t go crazy. London, England: Penguin Books. Barber, M. (2017). How to deliver improved outcomes for schools. Retrieved from https://www.wise-qatar.org/2017-wise-research-improved-outcomes-school-systems/
Barber, M., Donnelly, K., & Rizvi, S. (2013). An avalanche is coming: Higher education and the revolution ahead. London, England: Institute for Public Policy Research. Retrieved from http://www.avalancheiscoming.com/
Barber, M., Moffit, A., & Kihn, P. (2011a). Deliverology 101: A field guide for educational leaders. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Barber, M., Moffit, A., & Kihn, P. (2011b). Deliverology: From idea to implementation. Washington, DC: McKinsey and Co.
Bevan, G. (2012). The challenge of designing “good enough” performance measures & results framework. London, England: London School of Economics.
Bevan, G., & Hood, C. (2006). What’s measured is what matters: Targets and gaming in the English public health care system. Public Administration, 84(3), 517–538. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2006.00600.x
Birch, L., Jacob, S., & Baby-Bouchard, A. (2019). The Trudeau government’s legislative agenda: Election promises and a dual mandate. In L. Birch & F. Pétry (Eds.), Assessing Justin Trudeau’s Liberal government: 353 promises and a mandate for change (pp. 27–42). Quebec, QC: Presses de l’Université Laval.
Bimman, A. (2018, January 12). Analysis: Trudeau cabinet’s special guests. Global News. Retrieved from https://globalnews.ca/news/3962858/trudeau-cabinet-retreat-guests/
Brown, A. (2015, March 10). Helping governments govern. Retrieved from https://www.bcg.com/publications/2015/public-sector-helping-governments-govern.aspx
Cairney, P., & Oliver, K. (2017). Evidence-based policymaking is not like evidence-based medicine, so how far should you go to bridge the divide between evidence and policy? Health System Policy and Research, 15 (1), 35. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-017-0192-x
Canada, Privy Council Office. (2018a). Mandate letter tracker: Delivering results for Canadians. Retrieved from https://www.canada.ca/en/privy-council/campaigns/mandate-tracker-results-canadians.html
Canada, Privy Council Office. (2018b). The mandate letter tracker and the results and delivery approach. Retrieved from https://www.canada.ca/en/privy-council/services/results-delivery-unit.html
Canada School of Public Service. (2016a). Results and delivery—Lessons from around the world [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUJlDAy6KbY
Canada School of Public Service. (2016b). Sir Michael Barber: Results and delivery unit: Lessons for Canada. Matthew Mendelsohn interviews Michael Barber [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JogXHgPXhVs
Canada, Treasury Board Secretariat. (2007). Policy on reporting of federal institutions and corporate interests to Treasury Board Secretariat. Retrieved from http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pol/doc-eng.aspx?id=12622
Canada, Treasury Board Secretariat. (2009). Policy on evaluation. Retrieved from http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pol/doc-eng.aspx?id=15024
Canada, Treasury Board Secretariat. (2010). Policy on management, resources and results structures. Retrieved from http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pol/doc-eng.aspx?id=18218
Canada, Treasury Board Secretariat. (2013–2014). Evaluation of the 2009 policy on evaluation. Retrieved from https://www.canada.ca/en/treasury-board-secretariat/services/audit-evaluation/centre-excellence-evaluation/evaluation-2009-policy-evaluation.html
Canada, Treasury Board Secretariat. (2016a). Policy on results. Retrieved from http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pol/doc-eng.aspx?id=31300
Canada, Treasury Board Secretariat. (2016b). Directive on results. Retrieved from http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pol/doc-eng.aspx?id=31306
Canada, Treasury Board Secretariat. (n.d.). Infographic for government. Retrieved from https://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/ems-sgd/edb-bdd/index-eng.html#orgs/gov/gov/infograph/results
Canadian Evaluation Society. (2014). What is evaluation? Retrieved from https://evaluationcanada.ca/what-is-evaluation
Castonguay, A. (2016, November 28). Voici l’arme secrète de Trudeau. L’actualité. Retrieved from http://lactualite.com/politique/2016/11/28/voici-larme-secrete-de-trudeau/
Cantelli, F., Jacob, S., Genard, J.-L., & de Visscher, C. (Eds.). (2006). Les constructions de l’action publique. Paris, France: L’Harmattan, Coll. Logiques politiques.
Centre for Public Impact. (2016). The public impact fundamentals report: Helping governments progress from idea to impact. BCG Foundation. Retrieved from https://publicimpact.blob.core.windows.net/production/2016/10/CPI-FUNDAMENTALS-REPORT.pdf
Centre for Public Impact. (2017). A rubric for assessing public impact: Applying the public impact fundamentals to the real world. BCG Foundation. Retrieved from https://publicimpact.blob.core.windows.net/production/2017/03/5388-CPI-Rubric-For-Assessing-Public-Impact-v3.pdf
Centre for Public Impact. (n.d.). What is public impact? BCG Foundation. Retrieved from https://www.centreforpublicimpact.org/what-is-public-impact/
CFA Local 1983. (2010a, April 20). Why Deliverology made things worse in the UK. Part 2. Speech by John Seddon at California Faculty Association Assembly [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6n9TH5ktKFE
CFA Local 1983. (2010b, April 20). Why Deliverology made things worse in the UK. Part 3. Speech by John Seddon at California Faculty Association Assembly [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2sIFvpRilSc
Chouinard, J. A., & Milley, P. (2015). From new public management to new political governance: Implications for evaluation. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 30(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.3138/cjpe.30.1.1
Couture, J., & Jacob, S. (Eds.). (2019). Démocratie et politiques publiques. Quebec, QC: Presses de l’Université Laval. Cummings, H., & Gauthier, B. (2016). La SCÉ éduque l’Actualité à l’évaluation de programme. Retrieved from https://evaluationcanada.ca/fr/nouvelles/7306
Curran, R. (2016, April 27). Will deliverology work for the federal government? Policy Options/Options politiques. Retrieved from http://policyoptions.irpp.org/magazines/april-2016/is-deliverology-right-for-canada/
Delacourt, S. (2017, November 21) Stuck on hold: The AG’s report and a government that can’t get things done. Retrieved from https://ipolitics.ca/2017/11/21/stuck-hold-ags-report-government-cant-get-things-done
Delivery Associates. (n.d.a). Who we are. Retrieved from https://www.deliveryassociates.com/who-we-are
Delivery Associates. (n.d.b). Success delivered: How delivery units make a difference for governments and the citizens they serve. Retrieved from https://uploads-ssl.webflow.com/59ca37d5fcfbf3000197aab3/5aa1526b45d91c0001b762b4_Inc%20London%20-%20DINO%20Brochure%20Amends%20-%20WEB.pdf
Dobell, R., & Zussman, D. (2018). Sunshine, scrutiny, and spending review in Canada, Trudeau to Trudeau: From program evaluation and policy to commitment and results. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 32(3), 371–393. https://doi.org/10.3138/cjpe.43184
Dyer, E. (2016a, January 19). Justin Trudeau’s cabinet retreat stays on track until the end, almost. CBC News. Retrieved from http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/justin-trudeau-cabinet-retreat-new-brunswick-1.3411213
Dyer, E. (2016b, April 26). “Deliverology” guru schools Trudeau government for 2nd time at cabinet retreat. CBC News. Retrieved from http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/deliverology-liberal-cabinet-retreat-1.3553024
The Economist. (2015, March 26). Improving government: Delivery man. Th e Economist. Retrieved from https://www.economist.com/news/books-and-arts/21647263-tony-blairs-deliverology-expert-explains-how-reform-public-services-delivery-man
Fisher, C., & Downes, B. (2008). Performance measurement and metric manipulation in the public sector. Journal of Business Ethics: A European Review, 17 (3), 245–258. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8608.2008.00534.x
French, R. D. (2016, July 20). Trudeau’s challenge: Turning promises into policy. The Globe and Mail (Ontario edition), p. A13. Retrieved from https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/trudeaus-challenge-turning-promises-into-policy/article30829997/
Geddes, J. (2016, October 31).Why McKinsey & Co. is helping Ottawa out, pro bono. Maclean’s. Retrieved from http://www.macleans.ca/politics/ottawa/why-mckinsey-helping-ottawa-pro-bono/
Global Agenda Council on Education. (2016). Unleashing greatness: Nine plays to spark innovation in education [White paper]. Retrieved from http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_WP_GAC_Education_Unleashing_Greatness.pdf
Haws, E. (2018, January 24). Oft critiqued Liberal mandate tracker to become “more useful,” says government “deliverology” chief. The Hill Times. Retrieved from https://www.hilltimes.com/2018/01/24/liberals-mandate-letter-tracker-great-conversation-getting-refresh-momentarily-mendelsohn/131770
Hood, C. (2006). Gaming in targetworld: The targets approach to managing British public services. Public Administration Review, 66(4), 515–521. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00612.x
Hood, C. (2010). The blame game: Spin, bureaucracy, and self-preservation in government. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Hood, C. (2012). Public management by numbers as a performance-enhancing drug: Two hypotheses. Public Administration Review, 72(1), S85–S92. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2012.02634.x
Hood, C., & Dixon, R. (2015a). What we have to show for 30 years of new public management: Higher costs, more complaints. Governance, 28(3), 265–267. https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.12150
Hood, C., & Dixon, R. (2015b). A government that worked better and cost less? Evaluating three decades of reform and change in UK Central Government. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Institute on Governance. (2018). Results and performance bundle. Retrieved from https://web.archive.org/web/20190618163103/https://iog.ca/leadership-learning/course-bundles/results-and-performance-bundle
Jacob, S. (2006). Trente ans d’évaluation de programme au Canada : l’institutionnalisation interne en quête de qualité. Revue française d’administration publique, 119 (3), 515– 532. https://doi.org/10.3917/rfap.119.0515
Jacob, S . (2009a). Opération chloroforme ou la réinvention de l’État rationnel : l’évaluation et les données probantes. Criminologie, 42(1), 201–223. https://doi.org/10.7202/029813ar
Jacob, S. (2009b). Les systèmes de gestion de la performance et les mutations de la gestion publique contemporaine: enjeux et défis de la logique du classement. Éthique publique: Revue internationale d’éthique sociétale et gouvernementale, 11 (1), 140–147. https://doi.org/10.4000/ethiquepublique.1346
Jacob, S., Birch, L., Pétry, F., & Baby-Bouchard, A. (2018). Le gouvernement Couillard en tant que “mandataire indépendant.” In F. Pétry & L. Birch (Eds.), Le gouvernement Couillard: 158 promesses et un mandate contrasté (pp. 77–87). Quebec, QC: Presses de l’Université Laval.
Jacob, S., Miller-Pelletier, A., & Birch, L. (2017). Les enjeux éthiques de la gestion par les résultats: les enseignements de la loi américaine No Child Left Behind. In B. Mazoux (Ed.), Gestion par résultats: Concepts et pratiques de gestion de la performance des organisations de l’État (pp. 173–192). Quebec, QC: Les Presses de l’Université du Québec.
Jakobsen, M. L., Baekgaard, M., Moynihan, D. P., & van Loon, N. (2018). Making sense of performance regimes: Rebalancing external accountability and internal learning. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance, 1(2), 127–141. https://doi.org/10.1093/ppmgov/gvx001
Lahey, R. (2017). Connecting the dots between M, E, RBM ... and deliverology. Canadian Government Executive, 23(1), 6–8. Retrieved from http://canadiangovernmentexecutive.ca/dig/23_01/files/assets/basic-html/page-8.html
Lahey, R., & Nielsen, S. B. (2013). Rethinking the relationship among monitoring, evaluation, and results-based management: Observations from Canada. In S. B. Nielsen & D. E. K. Hunter (Eds.). Performance Management and Evaluation. New Directions for Evaluation, 137 , 45–56. https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.20045
Laihonen, H., & Mäntylä, S. (2017). Principles of performance dialogue in public administration. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 30( 5), 414–428. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijpsm-09-2016-0149
MacCharles, T. (2017, November 14). Trudeau government’s mandate tracker lets you see if federal ministers are keeping commitments. The Star. Retrieved from https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2017/11/14/trudeau-governments-mandate-tracker-lets-you-see-if-federal-ministers-are-keeping-commitments.html
Manning, N. (2015). Supporting “small” improvements in government functioning: A rough guide for development professionals. In A governance practitioner’s notebook: Alternative ideas and approaches (pp. 151–189). Paris, France: OECD. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/dac/accountable-effective-institutions/Governance%20Notebook%202.5%20Manning%20Small.pdf
Manning, N., & Watkins, J. (2013). Targeting results, diagnosing the means: Innovative approaches for improving public sector delivery. Recently Asked Questions Series. World Bank. Retrieved from http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/136171467986259116/pdf/98815-BRI-VC-ADD-SERIES-PUBLIC-Box393182B.pdf
Mansbridge, J. (2003). Rethinking representation. American Political Science Review, 97(4), 515–528. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055403000856
McGregor, G. (2016, May 24). Liberal government paid nearly $18,000 for “deliverology” guru. CTV News. Retrieved from https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/glen-mcgregor-under-embargo/liberal-government-paid-nearly-18-000-for-deliverology-guru-1.2914536
Montague, S. (2016). A response to does “deliverology” matter?: Targets can work if done properly. Retrieved from https://www.pmn.net/wp-content/uploads/Deliverology-Response-June-2016.pdf
Moynihan, D. P. (2005). Goal-based learning and the future of performance management. Public Administration Review, 65(2), 203–216. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2005.00445.x
Moynihan, D. P. (2008a). The dynamics of performance management: Constructing information and reform. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Moynihan, D. P. (2008b). Advocacy and learning: An interactive-dialogue approach to performance information use. In W. Van Dooren & S. Van de Wall (Eds.), Performance information in the public sector: How it gets used (pp. 24–41). London, England: Palgrave Macmillan.
Moynihan, D. P. (2010). A workforce of cynics? The effects of contemporary reforms on public service motivation. International Public Management Journal, 13 (1), 24–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/10967490903547167
Murekeyisoni, A. (2017). La résultologie (Deliverology) comme instrument d’action publique: un cas ontarien [Master’s thesis]. École d’études politiques, Université d’Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario. Retrieved from https://ruor.uottawa.ca/handle/10393/36086
Nilsen, P., Ståhl, C., Roback, K., & Cairney, P. (2013). Never the twain shall meet? A comparison of implementation science and policy implementation research. Implementation Science, 8 (1), 63. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-8-63
OECD. (2010). Quality standards for development evaluation. Paris, France: OECD.
Osborne, D., & Gaebler, T. (1993). Reinventing government: How the entrepreneurial spirit is transforming the public sector. New York, NY: Addison-Wesley.
Patton, M. Q. (1997). Utilization-focused evaluation: The new century text (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Pétry, F. (2014). A tale of two perspectives: Election promises and government actions in Canada. In E. Gidengil and H. Bastedo (Eds.), Canadian democracy from the bottom up (pp. 231–252). Vancouver, BC: UBC Press.
Pétry, F., & Birch, L. (2016). Justin Trudeau’s promises, one year later. Policy Options/ Options politiques. Retrieved from http://policyoptions.irpp.org/magazines/october-2016/justin-trudeaus-promises-one-year-later/
Pétry, F., & Birch, L. (Eds.). (2018). Le gouvernement Couillard: 158 promesses et un mandate contrasté. Quebec, QC: Presses de l’Université Laval.
Pétry, F., & Duval, D. (2015). To what extent do political parties follow their campaign promises? Journal of Parliamentary and Political Law. Édition spéciale, 341–364.
Poister, T. (2003). Measuring performance in public and nonprofit organizations. San Fransisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, John Wiley & Sons.
Puttick, R., & Ludlow, J. (2013). Standards of evidence: An approach that balances the need for evidence with innovation. NESTA (National Endowment for Science, Technology and the Arts). Retrieved from https://media.nesta.org.uk/documents/standards_of_evidence.pdf
Radwanski, A. (2017, November 17). Trudeau’s “deliverology” on the verge of becoming a punchline. The Globe and Mail. Retrieved from https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/trudeaus-deliverology-on-the-verge-of-becoming-a-punchline/article37023338/
Richards, G. (2018). Does deliverology deliver? Unpublished Paper. Teffler School of Management, University of Ottawa.
Richards, G., Gallo, C., & Kronick, M. (2017, January 30). Does “deliverology” deliver? Retrieved from https://canadiangovernmentexecutive.ca/does-deliverology-deliver/
Ryckewaert, L. (2016, June 6). Privy Council’s new delivery unit increase capacity for centralized control, say experts. The Hill Times. Retrieved from https://www.hilltimes.com/2016/06/06/new-pco-delivery-unit-increases-capacity-for-centralized-control-say-experts/67186
Sattler, P. (2012). Educational governance reforms in Ontario: Neoliberalism in context. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, 128, 1–28. Savoie, D. (2015). What is government good at? A Canadian answer. Montreal, QC: McGill-Queen’s University Press.
Schacter, M. (2002a). Not a “tool kit”; Practitioner’s Guide to measuring the performance of public programs. Retrieved from https://www.files.ethz.ch/isn/122186/Guide.pdf
Schacter, M. (2002b). What will be, will be: The challenge of applying results-based thinking to policy. Retrieved from https://iog.ca/research-publications/publications/what-will-be-will-be-the-challenge-of-applying-results-based-thinking-to-policy/
Schacter, M. (2006). Trashing results-based management or throwing out the baby with the bath water. Retrieved from https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/dadb01_1a72e3b10b1e968a8943337920ad8e64.pdf
Schacter, M. (2011). Tell me what I need to know: A practical guide to program evaluation for public servants. Retrieved from https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/dadb01_562bd8d94a9b0ca329730d21389d9b3e.pdf
Schacter, M. (2016). Does “deliverology” matter? Retrieved from https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/dadb01_67929f50ebaa46efa6e47df3526904a5.pdf
Seddon, J. (2008). Systems thinking in the public sector: The failure of the reform regime ... and a manifesto for a better way. Axminster, England: Triarchy Press. Seddon, J. (2013). Freedom from command and control: Rethinking management for a lean service. New York, NY: Productivity Press.
Shepherd, R. P. (2018). Expenditure reviews and the federal experience: Program evaluation and its contribution to assurance provision. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 32 (3), 347–370. https://doi.org/10.3138/cjpe.43180
Smith, M. J., Richards, D., Geddes, A., & Mathers, H. (2011). Analysing policy delivery in the United Kingdom: The case of street crime and anti-social behaviour. Public Administration, 89 (3), 975–1000. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2010.01892.x
Smithers, A. (2001). Education policy. In Anthony Seldon (Ed.), The Blair effect (pp 405– 426). London, England: Little Brown. Retrieved from https://www.buckingham.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/blaireduc.pdf
Tweedie, J. (2018, June 5). Does “deliverology” deliver the goods? Canadian Government Executive. Retrieved from https://canadiangovernmentexecutive.ca/does-deliverology-deliver-the-goods/
Wells, P. (2016a, February 18). Meet Sir Michael Barber, the political delivery man. Maclean’s. Retrieved from http://www.macleans.ca/politics/ottawa/meet-sir-michael-barber-the-political-delivery
Wells, P. (2016b, August 29). Cabinet committee changes give clues about happenings inside the Trudeau government. The Hill Times. Retrieved from https://www.hilltimes.com/2016/08/29/cabinet-committee-changes-give-clues-about-happenings-inside-trudeau-government/78576
Welsh, D. T., & Ordóñez, L. D. (2014). The dark side of consecutive high performance goals: Linking goal setting, depletion, and unethical behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 123(2), 79–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2013.07.006
Werner, A. (2018). Voters’ preferences for party representation: Promise-keeping, responsiveness to public opinion or enacting the common good. International Political Science Review , 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192512118787430
Wherry, A. (2016, August 27). How Justin Trudeau plans to deliver on “deliverology.” CBC News. Retrieved from http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/wherry-trudeau-deliverology-1.3735890
Wherry, A. (2017, November 14). Trudeau’s Liberals check their to-do list: 67 promises down, more than 200 still to go. CBC News. Retrieved from http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/liberals-mandate-promises-deliverology-analysis-wherry-1.4400036
Zilio, M. (2016, September 30, updated May 18, 2018). British “deliverology” expertise costing Liberals $200,000. The Globe and Mail. Retrieved from https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/liberals-spend-200000-for-advice-on-delivering-campaign-pledges/article32187629/
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2019 Lisa Birch, Steve Jacob
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Authors contributing to The Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation agree to release their articles under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 4.0 (CC-BY-NC) license. This licence allows this work to be copied, distributed, remixed, transformed, and built upon for any purpose provided that appropriate attribution is given, a link is provided to the license, and changes made were indicated.
Authors retain copyright of their work and grant the journal right of first publication.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
