Content uploaded by Wouter Van Dooren
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Wouter Van Dooren on Jul 18, 2014
Content may be subject to copyright.
Performance Information in the Public Sector: How It Is Used
Abstract
Performance information has long permeated the public sector. The actual use of performance information however has long been taken for granted. This book is one of the first to bring together an international team of acclaimed academics focusing on how and whether politicians, public officials, and citizens use public sector performance information. Combining practical experience with academic analysis this book explores the social and organizational dynamics of performance indicators. It moves beyond the technicalities of measurement and indicators and looks at how performance information is changing the public sector.
Chapters (14)
Martha S. Feldman, a distinguished student of the role of information in organizations and in decision making starts her seminal book Order without Design by writing about her experiences undertaking fieldwork for a research project in the US Department of Energy:
When I explained to the members of this office that I was interested in how the policy office produces information and how it was used, I was met time and again with the response that the information is not used.
(Feldman, 1989: 1)
In a critical analysis, Radin (2006) argued that the concern for performance in the United States has become so ubiquitous that it has taken the form of a movement — the performance movement. It is characterized by a mindset of long-term and mid-term goal setting, indicators, and quantitative measurement. In this chapter, I argue that we have witnessed not one, but several performance movements that have attempted to measure government outputs or outcomes in the twentieth century.
This chapter examines how agencies use performance information, and in particular the potential for performance information to foster goal-based learning in the public sector. The most crucial indicator for whether measuring performance is worth the effort is whether public managers are using performance information (Hatry, 2006). It is also the most difficult aspect of performance management, requiring individuals and organizations to change deeply entrenched decision behaviors by widening the scope of the information considered.
Over the past two decades there has been a significant increase in the use of performance management systems in the public sector internationally. These systems are widely used, but also criticized (Bouckaert and Peters, 2002; de Bruijn, 2002; Holzer and Yang, 2004; Johnsen, 2005; Radin, 2006). Over time, performance measurement has become more systematic, specialized, professionalized and institutionalized (Van Dooren, 2006). Performance information related to goals and objectives, measured through performance indicators and reported through ICT-based systems has increased (Bouckaert and Halligan, 2006). Yet, performance-based strategic steering is limited (Pollitt, 2006c).
Performance measurement has been expected to produce information that can be used to make better and more rational decisions. In the United States,thisbelief is directlyrelated to performance measurement’s lineage — scientific management and its perceived contribution to better government (see also Van Dooren in Chapter 1). In the early 1900s, organizations focused on developing procedures and measurement techniques to improve efficiency and increase the productivity of workers. For public organizations, the interest in efficiency, which is built into the traditional approaches to accountability (Brunsson, 1989: 5; Radin, 2002) was a reaction to the pervasiveness of patronage and corruption in the way government conducted its business. Thus began a series of efforts to replace rather subjective assessments of government performance with systematic and more precise measurement. There was an optimistic view that performance measurement would automatically lead to rational decision making and, thus, to good government (see also Chapter 13 by Van de Walle and Roberts). Performance measurement in this chapter refers to measures or indicators of inputs, outputs, efficiency, effectiveness and outcomes.
This chapter compares the models for managing performance of four countries and the extent to which they have been implemented. The approach is, first, to examine the countries in terms of their official models and how these compare to an ideal type of Performance Management. The second part addresses how the country models work in practice, focusing on the main dimensions of performance. The countries have well-developed performance management systems, but practice falls short of aspirations, and questions remain about the quality and use of performance information in the budget process, internal decision making and external reporting. Details of the country material and references are in Bouckaert and Halligan (2008).
Public services are by their nature complex (Moore, 2002), involving a large number of stakeholders. As a result, the number of public sector performance measures can quickly rise in order to reflect this complexity and to be accountable to the various stakeholders. Hood gives an example of the Health Department in England, where ten top-level targets “were translated into some 300 lower-level targets for various public sector health-delivery organizations” (2006: 515). In many countries we have seen a rapid proliferation of policies introducing performance indicators and targets in all areas of the public service sector, from local and central government to education, health and community care.
Performance measurement systems are promoted as mechanisms of accountability and, thus, enhancements to democratic control. Choices mustbe made aboutwhether the unitof accountability will be individuals, programs, agencies or larger systems. Focusing on the performance of the individual program or agency has the benefit of establishing clear lines of accountability, and has emerged as the most common focus of performance measurement systems. At the same time, the importance of partnerships and other forms of collaboration have been emphasized in management theory and practice. Complex social problems are typically addressed by multiple organizations inside and outside government, so (at a minimum) coordination among programs is necessary in order to avoid duplication or gaps, as well as to achieve better outcomes. The question is whether, and how, typical approaches to performance management are impacting partnerships and collaborations. Self-aligning collaborations, performanceagreements and social indicatorsare explored as mechanisms for achieving both accountability and collaboration in pursuit of outcomes oriented performance.
Performance management has become a defining feature of public administration, especially in OECD countries (Bouckaert and Halligan, 2006; Radin, 2000). Performance management consists of three routinized activities. The first is measuring the outputs, outcomes and throughputs of organizations, people and programs in government, thereby generating what will hereafter be called performance information. The second is analyzing performance information by comparing current performance levels to past ones, normative standards (like goals), and the performance of other organizations. The third activity is communicating performance information to appointed and elected decision makers in government.
This chapter turns its attention to the issue of how performance information is and isn’t used by the United Kingdom’s parliamentary scrutiny committees involved in scrutinizing government activity. Whilst performance management is largely rooted within the technocratic administrative arena, there is a growing trend towards the possibility, at least, that performance information could be used as one source of data for the purposes of supporting the democratic polity (Pollitt, 2006b). The case of the Public Service Agreements (PSAs) discussed below is, ostensibly, one example where there has been the intention to support the democratic use of performance information. The findings may lend support to Pollitt’s assertion that politicians, if interested in performance information at all, are interested in broad brush data only. They appear not to be engaged by the prospect of carrying out detailed scrutiny. However, the government itself has not given the PSA policy the precedence it deserved and may be partly responsible for the lack of scrutiny that PSA policy received.
We do not know a great deal about the way performance information is used in public policy in modern democracies (Pollitt, 2006b). Nonetheless, there lies a great potential for decision makers to use performance information to assess and enhance efficiency and effectiveness, as well as to provide feedback to stakeholders in the political system about the need for policy innovation. The tools that generate performance information include the use of performance indicators (PIs), performance audits and evaluations. This chapter focuses on the use of performance indicators as a means of informing public policy.
The New Public Management was a catalyst for monitoring activities in the public sector (Bouckaert, De Peuter and Van Dooren, 2003; Mayne and Zapico-Goni, 1997; Vedung, 1997). The Netherlands is no exception with amongst others a drug monitor, an integration monitor and a traffic mobility monitor. These monitors track policy-relevant developments in a systematic and periodic way. Although monitoring of policy processes is quite common in the public sector, the utilization of these monitors remains under-explored (Poister, 1983; Vedung, 1997). In the current mode of monitoring, rational assumptions are dominant (De Kool and van Buuren, 2004). This chapter argues that besides the rational approach, we need cultural and political perspectives for a better understanding of the utilization of monitors.
Today, performance measurement is a widely accepted tool of government management in the United States. At the national level, the George W. Bush administration has adopted the Performance Assessment Rating Tool to integrate performance measurement into strategic planning and budgeting (Breul and Moravitz, 2007). Many US state and local governments and professional organizations also have their own initiatives to promote performance measurement, “results-oriented” management, and public performance reporting (Berman and Wang, 2000; Jordan and Hackbart, 1999; Melkers and Willoughby, 2001; Poister and Streib, 1999).
Previous chapters have discussed, from a variety of viewpoints, the usefulness of the information generated by performance measurement processes in government. This chapter extracts from these materials, and discusses, three major dimensions of usefulness. These dimensions include: first, technical features on which usage may depend; second, the variety of types of potential users, each of whom is likely to need somewhat different performance information; and, third, the major ways in which performance information can be used. Then the chapter identifies the very substantial limitations of performance information, a topic that has seldom been well articulated in the past. Finally, the chapter does some crystal-ball gazing, discussing the future of performance measurement and performance management, especially as it relates to their likely future usefulness.
... Digital tools, while powerful, are only as effective as the people who use them. Therefore, the integration of technology must be accompanied by a parallel focus on human factors to create a balanced, holistic approach to performance management in the public sector (Van Dooren and Van de Walle, 2011;Vial, 2019). ...
... In the wake of developments such as evidence-based policymaking, performance management, and big data, public sector decision-makers possess historically unrivaled information on societal problems, their origins, and potential solutions (Moynihan 2008; Van Dooren and Van De Walle 2016). Paradoxically, this abundance of information leads to an ever-increasing scarcity of attention, as the available information greatly exceeds decision-makers' information-processing capacities (Simon 1971). ...
Issue prioritization is the first stage of attention-based theories of decision-making, but remains theoretically and empirically uncharted territory in public administration research. We propose and test how issue prioritization is informed by the characteristics of the performance information on which decision-makers rely, in particular its source (internal or external information), nature (objective or subjective information), aspiration level (historical, social, or coercive aspirations), and required cognitive effort (attention costs). Furthermore, we theorize how these characteristics of performance information determine issue prioritization decisions of political and managerial decision-makers in different ways. We empirically examine issue prioritization decisions in road maintenance and primary school education using a discrete choice experiment among 2,313 local government officials. The experiment reveals that decision-makers are more likely to prioritize issues that are signaled through objective performance measures and that are articulated relative to coercive aspirations, but that the effects of the information’s source and attention costs differ between policy domains. Comparison of observational variation regarding decision-makers’ roles indicates that public managers more strongly prioritize road maintenance issues that are articulated in objective performance information, but not in primary school education. The study advances public administration research and theory with a “horizontal” behavioral perspective on decision-makers’ information processing to prioritize between simultaneous performance issues.
Purpose
The performance governance model, based on the use of performance information to improve governance, is particularly complex, considering the inter-institutional relationships and community involvement that it requires. In order to contribute to the scientific debate on this model, the paper aims to highlight what are the challenges in developing three variables of performance governance (operational performance measurement tools, governance integration and citizen involvement) in the public health context.
Design/methodology/approach
Based on the previous literature, we identified three variables that characterize the performance governance model. We then explored them through the case study methodology applied to the Apulia Regional Health System.
Findings
The analysis allows us to conclude that the healthcare system under consideration is still far from applying the performance governance model, but it highlights some factors that are preparatory to the same. Moreover, starting from the empirical evidence, some considerations arise regarding managerial and policy making implications for the variables investigated.
Originality/value
The paper contributes to a growing body of critical literature on performance governance contextualizing the analysis in a particularly relevant area of the public sector, namely public health. Furthermore, the research also identifies some potential risks of the performance governance model (rigidity in performance measurement tool, organization-objective-responsibility relationship, participatory illusion).
Performance evaluation has great potential to encourage government officials to improve their behavior (performance-oriented government behavior, POGB), but it also tends to lead to behaviors that are detrimental to government performance (non-performance-oriented government behavior, NPOGB). The latter behaviors are prevalent in many parts of the world, especially in areas with fiscal federalist characteristics such as China. This study analyzes POGB and NPOGB and employs game theory to develop a theoretical model to explain the causes of NPOGBs in China, exploring how competition among different jurisdictions leads to them. The findings show that (1) POGB is a condition of Pareto optimality in government behavior, but only represents a very small share of all government behaviors. The majority of behaviors can be categorized as NPOGBs. (2) The primary reason continuous and volatile NPOGBs persist is that, from the perspective of local officials operating under the constraints of information scarcity and risk aversion, they are rational choices, and officials have to imitate one another’s behaviors so as not to be defeated in the competition with others.
Performance management in the public sector, including local government, has become far more pervasive in recent decades. Often performance indicators are summarized into a single score to enhance understanding and ease dissemination. However, the summation of performance indicators caries a risk that the rating assigned may largely be an artefact of the summarization strategy rather than an accurate representation of municipal performance. We employ the recent evaluation of New South Wales’ municipal performance to demonstrate that the performance indicator compilation strategy is indeed a major determinant of the ratings assigned to local councils. Moreover, we illustrate how ratings may exert a constitutive effect on municipalities by altering organizational behavior. A number of policy lessons are drawn from our empirical analysis, including significant methodological considerations and the need for higher levels of transparency.
The aim of the research is to identify the factors which enable / restrain public managers’ learning from past experience.
The article draws upon research undertaken in Italian local governments after the last performance-based reform (2009). It gives evidence of the ways of learning in organizations characterized by a bureaucratic administrative culture, a political regime instability and ones that operate under financial stress conditions. These circumstances are common in many public administrations in the “era” of the global financial, economic and fiscal crisis.
We based our analysis on a cross-sectional data set and the research was carried out using an OLS model.
Besides the factors identified in the performance management literature which foster public managers’ learning, we found that the political regime stability produced positive effects on learning. Moreover, executives in municipalities characterized with an higher percentage of enforcement measures tended to be more aware of the importance of measuring and analyzing past performance in order to reduce further potential financial criticalities.
Cet article explore la manière dont les députés abordent les aspects liés au genre dans le processus budgétaire au niveau central en Allemagne, un pays qui défend l’égalité des genres en tant qu’objectif global, mais qui n’a pas (encore) mis en œuvre une budgétisation sensible au genre (GB, pour « gender budgeting »). Néanmoins, du point de vue budgétaire, le contexte allemand est intéressant, car le Parlement dispose de pouvoirs illimités pour modifier le projet de budget. L’étude suit des approches proposées dans les courants de la littérature sur la gestion des performances qui ont exploré différents types d’utilisation de l’information sur les performances. S’appuyant sur une analyse qualitative des débats budgétaires parlementaires, nos résultats montrent que les aspects liés au genre sont importants dans la budgétisation, même lorsque le GB n’est pas mis en œuvre. Cependant, les ressources sont moins souvent mentionnées que les programmes et les politiques dans les débats budgétaires. Nous constatons que les députés abordent les aspects liés au genre de manière différenciée (ce qui s’observe dans quatre types d’utilisation de l’information sur la performance), et que cela est affecté par les caractéristiques de l’utilisateur : le genre des députés, leur appartenance à un parti, leur participation à une commission et, à certains égards, leur âge. Bien qu’il ne soit pas surprenant que les députés de sexe féminin agissent en tant que défenseuses des aspects liés au genre, il est intéressant de noter que les femmes députés sont plus susceptibles de faire référence aux ressources lorsqu’elles traitent des aspects liés au genre que leurs homologues de sexe masculin. En outre, notre analyse des types d’utilisation de l’information sur la performance montre que la position d’un parti en tant que membre d’une coalition gouvernementale ou d’une opposition, ainsi que les lignes partisanes à travers l’opposition, influent sur la façon dont les aspects liés au genre sont abordés : en exerçant une utilisation de type favorable (c.-à-d. légitimer, souligner) et des types d’utilisation plutôt contestataires (c.-à-d. délégitimer, dévier). Remarques à l’intention des praticiens Même dans un contexte où la budgétisation des questions de genre n’est pas mise en œuvre, les députés font référence à l’égalité des genres dans les débats budgétaires.
A local area configures a socioeconomic system in which several institutions interact. As stakeholders hold different values and perhaps conflicting interests, managing local area performance is a dynamic and complex issue. In these inter-institutional settings, performance management may help address such complexity. Traditional performance management approaches, mostly based on static and linear analysis, fail to capture the dynamic complexity of local-area performance, bounding decision-makers' mindsets to an organizational view of performance. Overcoming such limitations requires methods oriented to grasp a better understanding of the social reality in which their institutions operate. This contribution aims to illustrate how the Dynamic Performance Management (DPM) approach may foster a "performative" (We are indebted to Maria Cleofe Giorgino and Federico Barnabè, who illustrated the "performative" potential of "calculative practices" at the Workshop "Le sfide della sostenibilità. Profili aziendali e giuridici" organized by the Department of Business and Law Studies at the University of Siena, 11 October 2023. Such a perspective on the "performativity" of performance information use has remarkably enriched the conceptual positioning of our paper) use of performance information by decision-makers in inter-institutional settings. To this end, the article highlights the importance of designing conducive learning settings (i.e., action research enhanced by a system dynamics-based interactive learning environment) to support decision-makers make such a cognitive leap. Drawing from empirical evidence on destination governance studies, the article shows that enriching performance management with system dynamics modeling may help decision-makers to reflect on key issues impacting local area development, sparking a discussion on potential actions to balance economic, social, and competitive dimensions of performance. Findings reveal that DPM insight modeling holds explanatory and communicative potential in real forums by providing decision-makers with an understanding of the means-end relationships linking strategic resources to outcomes through value drivers. The use of such performance information can help local area stakeholders to (re)conceptualize the social reality in which their institutions operate. By acting as a "maieutic machine", DPM fosters a shift from an organizational and static to an inter-organizational and dynamic view of local area performance. Implications of the study include the opportunity to provide training to strengthen the active use of performance information by decision-makers in inter-institutional settings.
Publikacja jest dostępna w wersji elektronicznej:
https://www.wydawnictwo-siz.pl/badania-naukowe-w-zakresie-rachunkowosci-zarzadczej-z-prac-lodzkiej-szkoly-rachunkowosci-w-latach-2017-2022/
Celem monografii jest zebranie, usystematyzowanie i opisanie wyników badań w zakresie rachunkowości zarządczej przeprowadzonych w Katedrze Rachunkowości na Wydziale Zarządzania Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego (WZ UŁ) w latach 2017–2022, a także określenie poglądów pracowników Katedry na istotę i cele rachunkowości zarządczej jako działalności praktycznej.
Publikacja stanowi kontynuację prezentacji dorobku z zakresu rachunkowości zarządczej łódzkiej szkoły rachunkowości, powstałej w 1948 roku, zapoczątkowanej przez profesora Edwarda Wojciechowskiego, który kierował Katedrą Rachunkowości w latach 1950–1973, i ukształtowanej przez profesor Alicję Jarugę, kierownika Katedry Rachunkowości w UŁ w latach 1973–1998. Wyniki prac badawczych dotyczących rachunkowości zarządczej w gospodarce rynkowej do 2016 roku zostały zaprezentowane w rozdziale 10 (Szychta, Michalak, 2018) monografii pt. Łódzka szkoła rachunkowości w procesie transformowania systemu rachunkowości w Polsce w latach 1989–2016: wyzwania dla praktyki i nauki pod redakcją Ireny Sobańskiej i Radosława Ignatowskiego (Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego, 2018), a dorobek pracowników Katedry w okresie gospodarki centralnie planowanej m.in. w „Zeszycie Teoretycznym Rachunkowości”, nr 42(98), wydanym w 2008 roku (s. 51–53).
Niniejsza praca zawiera cztery rozdziały i zakończenie.
1. Rozumienie rachunkowości zarządczej w łódzkiej szkole rachunkowości
2. Historia rachunku kosztów i rachunkowości zarządczej
3. Rachunkowość zarządcza w procesach operacyjnych i strategicznych
4. Rachunkowość zarządcza w kontekście zrównoważonego rozwoju
Monografia ta, stanowiąca przegląd i syntetyczny opis wyników badań z zakresu rachunkowości zarządczej przeprowadzanych w ostatnich kilku latach w Katedrze Rachunkowości funkcjonującej 75 lat w strukturach organizacyjnych Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego, ma nie tylko wymiar historyczny. Autorzy wyrażają bowiem nadzieję, że przedstawione w niej koncepcje, podejścia i obszary badawcze będą kontynuowane w łódzkiej szkole rachunkowości, a także zainspirują badaczy, a zwłaszcza doktorantów, w innych ośrodkach naukowych w Polsce do podejmowania pogłębionych, nowatorskich i interdyscyplinarnych dociekań badawczych w sferze rachunkowości zarządczej, w tym ukierunkowanej na zrównoważony rozwój podmiotów gospodarczych. Niniejsza publikacja jest skierowana również do studentów kierunków i specjalności w ramach dyscyplin naukowych nauki o zarządzaniu i jakości oraz ekonomia i finanse, zainteresowanych problematyką rozwoju i wdrażania systemów rachunkowości zarządczej w praktyce.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.