IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/ugeofs/16721.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Benchmarking Organizational Performance Of University Extension: A Stochastic Frontier Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Lohr, Luanne
  • Park, Timothy A.

Abstract

A stochastic frontier model is used to explain the performance evaluation of U.S. university extension providers by organic producers. The model makes explicit the nonmanagerial factors that influence both performance ratings and performance efficiency, defined as achieving a rating as close to the "best" rating as possible. Results indicate that extension agents are performing at relatively high mean efficiency of 0.92, but that the average rating is relatively low at 2.66 on a four-point scale. Several sources of potential bias in ratings are identified as a way for managers to more accurately conduct individual performance assessments. Programmatic changes to emphasize more collaborative research and training are suggested by the positive effects on performance efficiency associated with farmer research commitment and production problem severity.

Suggested Citation

  • Lohr, Luanne & Park, Timothy A., 2004. "Benchmarking Organizational Performance Of University Extension: A Stochastic Frontier Approach," Faculty Series 16721, University of Georgia, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:ugeofs:16721
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.16721
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/16721/files/fs04006.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.16721?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. Lazear, Edward P, 1997. "Incentives in Basic Research," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 15(1), pages 167-197, January.
    2. Kalirajan, K. P. & Shand, R. T., 2001. "Technology and farm performance: paths of productive efficiencies over time," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 24(3), pages 297-306, March.
    3. Peter C. Smith & Maria Goddard, 2008. "Performance Management and Operational Research: A Marriage Made in Heaven?," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Richard Thorpe & Jacky Holloway (ed.), Performance Management, chapter 9, pages 120-136, Palgrave Macmillan.
    4. Atkinson, Scott E. & Primont, Daniel, 2002. "Stochastic estimation of firm technology, inefficiency, and productivity growth using shadow cost and distance functions," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 108(2), pages 203-225, June.
    5. Avinash Dixit, 2002. "# Incentives and Organizations in the Public Sector: An Interpretative Review," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 37(4), pages 696-727.
    6. Steven D. Levitt, 1995. "Optimal Incentive Schemes When Only the Agents' "Best" Output Matters to the Principal," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 26(4), pages 744-760, Winter.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Park, Timothy A. & Lohr, Luanne, 2007. "Performance evaluation of university extension providers: A frontier approach for ordered response data," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 182(2), pages 899-910, October.
    2. Lohr, Luanne & Park, Timothy A., 2008. "Testing Nonlinear Logit Models of Performance Effectiveness Ratings: Cooperative Extension and Organic Farmers," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 40(2), pages 667-679, August.
    3. Timothy A. Park & Luanne Lohr, 2007. "Meeting the Needs of Organic Farmers: Benchmarking Organizational Performance of University Extension," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 29(1), pages 141-155.
    4. Murphy, Richard & Weinhardt, Felix & Wyness, Gill, 2021. "Who teaches the teachers? A RCT of peer-to-peer observation and feedback in 181 schools," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    5. Trigo Gamarra, Lucinda, 2008. "The effects of liberalization and deregulation on the performance of financial institutions: The case of the German life insurance market," Thuenen-Series of Applied Economic Theory 93, University of Rostock, Institute of Economics.
    6. Michaelowa, Katharina & Borrmann, Axel, 2004. "What Determines Evaluation Outcomes? Evidence from Bi- and Multilateral Development Cooperation," HWWA Discussion Papers 310, Hamburg Institute of International Economics (HWWA).
    7. Pierre Koning & J. Vyrastekova & S. Onderstal, 2006. "Team incentives in public organisations; an experimental study," CPB Discussion Paper 60, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    8. Josse Delfgaauw & Robert Dur, 2008. "Incentives and Workers' Motivation in the Public Sector," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(525), pages 171-191, January.
    9. Saul Lach & Mark Schankerman, 2008. "Incentives and invention in universities," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 39(2), pages 403-433, June.
    10. Carolyn J. Heinrich & Gerald Marschke, 2010. "Incentives and their dynamics in public sector performance management systems," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(1), pages 183-208.
    11. Mads Leth Felsager Jakobsen & Thomas Pallesen, 2017. "Performance Budgeting in Practice: the Case of Danish Hospital Management," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 255-273, June.
    12. Burt S. Barnow & Jeffrey Smith, 2015. "Employment and Training Programs," NBER Chapters, in: Economics of Means-Tested Transfer Programs in the United States, Volume 2, pages 127-234, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Andrew Dustan & Juan Manuel Hernandez-Agramonte & Stanislao Maldonado, 2018. "Motivating bureaucrats with non-monetary incentives when state capacity is weak: Evidence from large-scale," Natural Field Experiments 00664, The Field Experiments Website.
    14. Guy Nkamleu, 2004. "Productivity Growth, Technical Progress and Efficiency Change in African Agriculture," African Development Review, African Development Bank, vol. 16(1), pages 203-222.
    15. Jovanovic, Dragan, 2013. "Mergers, managerial incentives, and efficiencies," DICE Discussion Papers 88, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    16. Simar, Leopold & Wilson, Paul W., 2007. "Estimation and inference in two-stage, semi-parametric models of production processes," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 136(1), pages 31-64, January.
    17. Margarita Genius & Spiro Stefanou & Vangelis Tzouvelekas, 2009. "Productivity Growth and Efficiency under Leontief Technology: An Application to US Steam-Electric Power Generation Utilities," Working Papers 0913, University of Crete, Department of Economics.
    18. repec:aia:aiaswp:157 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Antonio Sánchez Soliño, 2019. "Sustainability of Public Services: Is Outsourcing the Answer?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-12, December.
    20. Canice Prendergast, 2016. "Bureaucratic Responses," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 34(S2), pages 183-215.
    21. Carayol, Nicolas & Dalle, Jean-Michel, 2007. "Sequential problem choice and the reward system in Open Science," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 167-191, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;

    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:ags:ugeofs:16721. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/daugaus.html .

    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.