Kaplan, David S.Sadka, Joyce2014-08-252014-08-252014-05http://hdl.handle.net/10625/53063To perform quality control of a complex task undertaken by a bureaucrat, intervening earlier in the process and preventing mistakes would be more effective than the appeals process. The study detected errors in case files in the final decision process, and provided information on errors to the law clerk responsible for the draft decision. Widespread and consistent errors were measured. Findings show that law clerks revised their decisions in less than one quarter of the cases indicating errors. Without a binding internal review process, ex-post quality control of draft decisions will not substantially reduce successful appeals.Text1 digital file (14 p. : ill.)Application/pdfenECONOMIC DEVELOPMENTLABOUR POLICYCAPACITY BUILDINGLABOUR COURTSLABOUR LAWBUREAUCRACYNORTH AND CENTRAL AMERICAJUDICIAL SYSTEMLATIN AMERICAMEXICOACCOUNTABILITYADMINISTRATIVE LAWPUBLIC ADMINISTRATIONJournal Article (peer-reviewed)