Webb, Natalie J and Candreva, Philip J (2009): Diagnosing performance management and performance budgeting systems: A case study of the U.S. Navy.
Download (139Kb) | Preview
We present here a case study of an organization within the U.S. Navy that created a new organizational construct and performance management system. We explore the issues faced by naval leaders as they attempt to use their performance information to make resource allocation decisions at the sub-organization level, and base budgets at the organization and service (navy) level. We attempt to diagnose many of the practical problems a government organization encounters when implementing a performance management system, to include trying to inform budgets, and make recommendations on actions that would improve the strength of the performance system. We find in the organization a good conceptual framework, organizational enthusiasm, and reasonable attempts to link disparate information systems into a coherent whole. The good intentions are hindered, however, by inadequate accounting systems, a lack of understanding of cost accounting methods, weak use of terminology and longstanding institutional attitudes. This case confirms challenges associated with both performance management systems and performance budgeting found in the literature, and we offer recommendations for public officials considering such endeavors.
|Item Type:||MPRA Paper|
|Original Title:||Diagnosing performance management and performance budgeting systems: A case study of the U.S. Navy|
|Keywords:||performance management; performance budgeting; public budgeting|
|Subjects:||E - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics > E6 - Macroeconomic Policy, Macroeconomic Aspects of Public Finance, Macroeconomic Policy, and General Outlook > E62 - Fiscal Policy
H - Public Economics > H1 - Structure and Scope of Government > H11 - Structure, Scope, and Performance of Government
H - Public Economics > H6 - National Budget, Deficit, and Debt > H61 - Budget; Budget Systems
|Depositing User:||Natalie J Webb|
|Date Deposited:||23. Apr 2009 03:10|
|Last Modified:||13. Feb 2013 07:19|
Brown, R.E., Myring, M.J. & Gard, C.G. "Activity-basec costing in government: Possibilities and pifalls." Public Budgeting & Finance 19(2), 1999: 3-21.
Casey, W., Peck, W., Webb, N.J. & Quast, P. "Are we driving strategic results or metric mania? Evaluating performance in the public sector." International Public Managmenet Review, 9(2), 2008: 90-106.
Congressional Budget Office. Using performance measures in the federal budget process. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1993.
Euske, K. J., Frause, N., Peck, T., Rosenstiel, B. & Schreck, S. "Applying activity-based performance measures to service processees: Process relationship maps and process analysis." Inetrnational Journal of Strategic Cost Management, 1999: 3-16.
Frumpkin, P. & Galaskiewicz, J. "Institutional Isomorphism and Public Sector Organizations." Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 14, no. 3 (2004): 283-307.
Grizzle, Gloria A. "Linking Performance to Funding Decisions: What is the Budgeter's Role?" Public Productivity and Management Review 41 (1987): 33-44.
Hackbart, Meagan M. Jordan and Merl M. "Performance Budgeting and Performance Funding in the States: A States Assessment." Public Budgeting & Finance 19, no. 1 (1999): 68-88.
Hatry, H. "What types of performance information should be tracked?" In Quicker, Better, Cheaper?: managing performance in American government, by D.W. Forsythe, 17-34. Albany, NY: Rockefeller Institute, 2001.
Havens, H.S. "A public accounting: Integrating evaluation and budgeting." Public Budgeting & Finance, 1983: 102-113. HM Treasury. Choosing the right fabrice: A framework for performance information. London: HM Treasury, 2001.
Joyce, P.G. "Using performance measures in the federal budget process: Proposals and prospects." Public Budgeting & Finance 13(4), 1993: 3-17.
Joyce, Philip G. Linking Performance and Budgeting: Opportunities in the Federal Budget Process. Washington, DC: IBM Center for the Business of Government, 2003.
Keeney, R.L., & Gregory, R. S. "Selecting Attributes to Measure the Achievement of Objectives." Operations Research, 53(1), 2005: 1-11.
Lu, H. "Performance budgeting resuscitated: why is it still inviable?" Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & financial Management, 10(2), 1998: 151-172.
McCaffery, L.R. Jones and Jerry. "Assessing Options fo Changing the Federal Government Budget Process." Public Finance and Management 2, no. 3 (2002): 436-469.
McNab, R.,M., & Melese, F. "Implementing the GPRA: Examining the prospects for performance budgeting in the federal government." Public Budgeting and Finance, 2003: 73-95.
Mullins, D.R. & Zorn, C.K. "Is Activity-Based Costing up to the challeng when it comes to privaization of local government services?" Public Budgeting & Finance 19(2), 1999: 37-58.
Niskanen, William A. Bureaucracy and Representative Government. Chicago: Aldine-Atherton, 1971.
Robinson, Marc. "Performance Budgeting Models and Mechanisms." In Performance Budgeting: Linking Funding and Results, by Marc, Ed. Robinson, edited by Marc Robinson, 1-21. New York: International Monetary Fund, 2007.
Salancik, Jeffrey Pfeffer and Gerald R. The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2003.
Schick, A. "Does budgeting have a future?" OECD Public Management Service, 2001: 3-10.
—. "Getting Performance Budgeting to Perform." World Bank. 2008. http://siteresources.worldbank.org/MEXICOEXTN/Resources/ConceptPaperAllenSchickFinal.pdf (accessed January 2008, 8). Schick, A. "Performance Budgeting and Accrual Budgeting: Decision Rules or Analytic Tools?" OECD Journal on Budgeting, 7(2), 2007: 109-138.
Williams, C. & Melhuish, W. "Is ABCM destined for success or failure in the federal government?" Public Budgeting & Finance, 1999: 22-36.
Willoughby, Julia Melkers and Katherine. "The State of the States: Performance-Based Budgeting Requirements in 47 Out of 50." Public Administration Review 58, no. 1 (1998): 66-73.