IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/ecdequ/v18y2004i2p174-185.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Developing Performance Metrics for Science and Technology Programs: The Case of the Manufacturing Extension Partnership Program

Author

Listed:
  • Kenneth P. Voytek
  • Karen L. Lellock
  • Mark A. Schmit

Abstract

This article examines the development, implications, and limitations of a series of performance measures to gauge the success of individual Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) centers. The measures represent a shift in how MEP judges and evaluates center performance and a challenge in terms of how they are used, how they are interpreted, and how they are limited. The MEPis an important example of innovative public programs and consists of a public-private, performance-based partnership that seeks to improve the productivity, competitiveness, and technological capabilities of America’s manufacturers, particularly small firms. The article makes two important contributions: (a) a comprehensive performance-management approach can be developed with a focus on program outcomes that are linked to long-term impacts and are not just stand-alone process measures or stand-alone outcome measures and (b) it is possible to develop valid and reliable measures for technology-focused economic development programs that can be used to report on and manage performance.

Suggested Citation

  • Kenneth P. Voytek & Karen L. Lellock & Mark A. Schmit, 2004. "Developing Performance Metrics for Science and Technology Programs: The Case of the Manufacturing Extension Partnership Program," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 18(2), pages 174-185, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:ecdequ:v:18:y:2004:i:2:p:174-185
    DOI: 10.1177/0891242404263631
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0891242404263631
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0891242404263631?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Irwin Feller, 1997. "Federal and State Government Roles in Science and Technology," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 11(4), pages 283-295, November.
    2. Ronald S. Jarmin, 1999. "Evaluating the impact of manufacturing extension on productivity growth," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(1), pages 99-119.
    3. Donald F. Kettl, 1997. "The global revolution in public management: Driving themes, missing links," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(3), pages 446-462.
    4. Georghiou, Luke & Roessner, David, 2000. "Evaluating technology programs: tools and methods," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 657-678, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Marco R. Di Tommaso & Stuart O. Schweitzer, 2013. "Industrial Policy in America," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13749.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lauren Lanahan, 2016. "Multilevel public funding for small business innovation: a review of US state SBIR match programs," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 41(2), pages 220-249, April.
    2. Irwin Feller, 2013. "Performance measures as forms of evidence for science and technology policy decisions," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 38(5), pages 565-576, October.
    3. Timothy J. Bartik, 2004. "Evaluating the Impacts of Local Economic Development Policies on Local Economic Outcomes: What Has Been Done and What Is Doable?," Book chapters authored by Upjohn Institute researchers, in: Evaluating Local Economic and Employment Development: How to Access Waht Works Among Programmes and Policies, pages 113-142, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.
    4. Stuart D. Allen & Stephen K. Layson & Albert N. Link, 2013. "Public gains from entrepreneurial research: Inferences about the economic value of public support of the Small Business Innovation Research program," Chapters, in: Public Support of Innovation in Entrepreneurial Firms, chapter 6, pages 105-112, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. Roper, Stephen & Hewitt-Dundas, Nola & Love, James H., 2004. "An ex ante evaluation framework for the regional benefits of publicly supported R&D projects," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 487-509, April.
    6. Deepak Hegde, 2005. "Public and Private Universities: Unequal Sources of Regional Innovation?," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 19(4), pages 373-386, November.
    7. Bradford J Jensen & Ron Jarmin, 1997. "Measuring The Performance Of Government Technology Programs: Lessons From Manufacturing Extension," Working Papers 97-18, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    8. Timothy J. Bartik, 2009. "The Revitalization of Older Industrial Cities: A Review Essay of Retooling for Growth," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(1), pages 1-29, March.
    9. Ebersberger, Bernd & Edler, Jakob & Lo, Vivien, 2006. "Improving policy understanding by means of secondary analyses of policy evaluation: a concept development," Discussion Papers "Innovation Systems and Policy Analysis" 12, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI).
    10. Hans Pohl, 2021. "Internationalisation, innovation, and academic–corporate co-publications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(2), pages 1329-1358, February.
    11. FUKUGAWA Nobuya, 2016. "Knowledge Creation and Dissemination by Local Public Technology Centers in Regional and Sectoral Innovation Systems: Insights from patent data," Discussion papers 16061, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    12. Nathalie Taverdet-Popiolek, 2022. "Economic Footprint of a Large French Research and Technology Organisation in Europe: Deciphering a Simplified Model and Appraising the Results," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 13(1), pages 44-69, March.
    13. Regina Pacheco, 2013. "Arm’s Length Bodies in Brazil: Contradictions and Challenges," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 13(2), pages 131-141, June.
    14. Victoria Castillo & Lucas Figal Garone & Alessandro Maffioli & Moira Ohaco, 2016. "Asistencias técnicas y competitividad de las MiPyMEs: Evidencia para Argentina," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 96960, Inter-American Development Bank.
    15. Whelan, Adele & McGuinness, Seamus & Barrett, Alan, 2021. "Review of International Approaches to Evaluating Rural and Community Development Investment and Supports," Research Series, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI), number RS124, June.
    16. Nobuya Fukugawa, 2016. "Knowledge creation and dissemination by Kosetsushi in sectoral innovation systems: insights from patent data," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(3), pages 2303-2327, December.
    17. Catalina Martínez & Laura Cruz-Castro & Luis Sanz-Menéndez, 2016. "Innovation capabilities in the private sector: evaluating subsidies for hiring S&T workers in Spain," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 25(2), pages 196-208.
    18. Richard M Walker & Ling Hin Li, 2002. "Reinventing Government? Explaining Management Reform at the Hong Kong Housing Authority," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 20(4), pages 573-592, August.
    19. Caroline Stiel, 2017. "Modern Public Enterprises: Organisational Innovation and Productivity," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1713, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    20. Sarah A. Low & Jason P. Brown, 2017. "Manufacturing Plant Survival in a Period of Decline," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(3), pages 297-312, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:ecdequ:v:18:y:2004:i:2:p:174-185. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.