Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to discuss the concept of Administration of Justice as a research field and set out an agenda for future studies that could promote the production of scientific knowledge in this area. Design/methodology/approach: This paper explores the idiosyncratic features, dimensions of analysis upon the Administration of Justice, states a research agenda and discusses the main challenges on this theme. This paper conceptualizes Administration of Justice as a research field and discusses related phenomena from institutional and economic perspectives on innovation, performance, governance and legitimacy. Findings: As a research field, Administration of Justice is defined as a set of theoretical concepts, research methods and techniques, aiming to investigate the management processes associated with the use and articulation of resources, knowledge and institutions, at different levels of the justice system, and their influence on the provision of justice in a given social context. As social phenomena, four levels of analysis are proper to investigate the justice system: societal, inter-organizational, organizational and operational. Innovation, performance, governance and legitimacy are central themes of the Administration of Justice and present various gaps and research opportunities. Research limitations/implications: The main implications is the proposal of an agenda for future studies on the Administration of Justice field, which is an important step in raising awareness of the issue. Originality/value: Administration of Justice encompasses a growing interest among academics, justice practitioners and public managers regarding managerial and political practices carried out in the justice system. Although relevant, this subject has been scarcely studied by the management community. This paper invites community to adopt an organizational and institutional perspective to Administration of Justice, setting an agenda for future research.

O desempenho no Judiciário constitui um tema socialmente importante, no entanto, a pesquisa nessa área ainda carece de volume e sistematização teórica e metodológica que possibilitem a institucionalização do conhecimento. Diante disso, foi realizada uma análise da produção científica a respeito do tema. Foram revisados estudos empíricos publicados entre 1992 e 2011, que apresentavam como objetivo avaliar ou mensurar o desempenho em judiciários. Os resultados mostram que o conceito de desempenho judicial é multidimensional, multinível e tem como elemento central os juízes. Eficiência e celeridade são as dimensões de desempenho mais abordadas. Os resultados indicam que o tema é pouco explorado na área de administração pública. Com base nos resultados encontrados é oferecida uma agenda de pesquisa para estudos futuros.

Court caseload management is of key importance for guaranteeing the adjudication of cases and depends on how judges and administrative assistants deal with their workload. Results from several studies indicate that an increase in court caseload tends to generate an increase in the judge’s production. However, some authors argue that this relationship is far more complex. To develop a fuller understanding of this relationship we tested an array of direct and moderating hypotheses. We used secondary data from 566 judges working in first trial courts in the State Justice System of Sao Paulo, Brazil. The results indicate a direct and positive relationship between court caseload and judge production, but the strength of this relationship depends on court specialty. The findings also indicate that the number of administrative assistants, judge experience and the number of places a judge works all moderate the caseload-production relationship. The results contribute to the development of strategies to address the delays and congestion of courts, two of the main Brazilian Judiciary problems.