Critical considerations on defining and measuring performance in public organizations

Cioclea, Alexandra Ema (2011): Critical considerations on defining and measuring performance in public organizations.

Abstract

Performance evaluation plays a central role in improving public service quality and increasing efficiency and accountability in the public sector. New Public Management recommends performance evaluation as a tool for rationalizing public budgeting, promoting better reporting systems and developing internal diagnosis systems. This paper aims to analyze the characteristics of performance evaluation and to highlight its influences in public organizations. The study is based on review and analysis of academic research, government documents and personal perspectives. The paper argues that managerial practices and tools for defining and evaluating performance can be used for cultivating the “achievement culture” in public sector organizations.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Public management, performance, evaluation, indicators
• Subjects: D - Microeconomics > D7 - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making > D73 - Bureaucracy ; Administrative Processes in Public Organizations ; Corruption; H - Public Economics > H1 - Structure and Scope of Government > H11 - Structure, Scope, and Performance of Government

References

Ammons D. N. (2002), Performance measurement and managerial thinking, Public Performance and Management Review, vol. 25, nr. 4.

Armstrong M. (2006), Performance Management. Key Strategies and Practical Guidelines, Kogan Page Ltd, UK.

Behn R. (2003), Why Measure performance? Different purposes Require Different Measures, Public Administration Review, vol. 63, nr. 5.

Bouckaert, G., & Halligan, J. (2008). Managing Performance: International Comparisons. London/New York, N.Y, Routledge.

Bolton M. (2003), Public sector performance measurement: Delivering greater accountability, Work Study, vol. 52, nr. 1.

Carter N., Day P. and Klein R. (1992), How Organisations Measure Success. The Use of Performance Indicators in Government, London, Routledge.

Cavalluzzo K., Ittner C. (2004), Implementing performance measures innovations: evidence from government, Accounting, Organizations and Society, nr. 29.

Ghobadian A.(2009), Explaining the unintended consequences of public sector reform, Management Decision, vol. 47, nr. 10, 2009.

Hood, C (1991), A public management for All Seasons?, Public Administration, nr. 69.

Kettl, D.F. (1997), The Global Revolution in Public Management: Driving Themes, Missing Links, Journal of Public Policy Analysis and Management, vol. 16, nr. 3.

Osborne D, Gebler T. (1993), Reinventing Government: How the Entrepreneurial Spirit is Transforming the Public Sector, London, Plume.

Pollitt C., Bouckaert G. (2004), Public management reform: a comparative analysis, 2nd edition, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

Rantanen H, Kulmala H., Lonnqvist A, Kujansivu P. [2007], Performance measurement systems in the Finnish public sector, international Journal of Public Sector Management, Vol. 20, Issue no. 5.

Saad G.H. (2001), Strategic performance evauation: descriptive and prescriptive analysis, Industrial Management and Data Systems, Vol. 101, Issue no. 8.

Summermatter L., Siegel J.P. (2009), Defining Performance in Public Management: Variations over time and space, Paper for IRSPM XXIII, Copenhagen, 6-8 April, 2009.

Tampieri L. (2005), Performance Evaluation Indexes in Public Administration – Some issues of their actual usefulness, Uprava, Ietnik III, nr. 2.