A framework for comparative analysis of performance management

Performance management lacks a coherent treatment that analyses its several dimensions as a working system and that can be used for comparative purposes. This paper develops a framework for clarifying the diverse uses and combinations of performance, measurement and management that has three components – performance measurement without management, management of performance of specific functions and performance management. Four models are distinguished that can be applied to the historical development of performance and management, analysing and comparing country orientations to performance and thinking analytically about performance management and its components. Introduction Performance has become a defining feature of modern government. The age of performance has produced commitment to, but not necessarily clarity about, the universal objective of organizational and government improvement. Performance and performance management continue to be enigmatic concepts. There is a paradox too in that the adoption rate of performance approaches continues to expand despite the mounting critique. One limitation has been the failure to integrate performance and measurement within a broader system of management and within a conception of organisational life that invests practice with greater meaning. Performance management lacks a coherent treatment that explicates its significance, analyses its several dimensions as a working system and challenges its shortcomings. The purpose of this chapter is to seek an understanding of performance and performance

[1]  E. Ferlie,et al.  The Oxford Handbook of Public Management , 2007 .

[2]  Harry P. Hatry,et al.  Performance Measurement: Getting Results , 2007 .

[3]  L. R. Jones,et al.  18. ASSESSING PUBLIC MANAGEMENT REFORM STRATEGY IN AN INTERNATIONAL CONTEXT , 2004 .

[4]  C. Hood,et al.  The Middle Aging of New Public Management: Into the Age of Paradox? , 2004 .

[5]  Daniel W. Williams.  Evolution of Performance Measurement Until 1930 , 2004 .

[6]  Geert Bouckaert,et al.  Public Management Reform: A Comparative Analysis , 2004 .

[7]  Colin Camerer,et al.  Overview and synthesis , 2004 .

[8]  Daniel W. Williams.  Measuring Government in the Early Twentieth Century , 2003 .

[9]  P. Ingraham,et al.  Government Performance: Why Management Matters , 2003 .

[10]  Linda J. Chia.  Government of the future: OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development). Paris: Governance, OECD, 2000, 256 pp. $20. ISBN 92-64-18448-1 , 2003, Gov. Inf. Q..

[11]  L. R. Jones,et al.  ASSESSING PUBLIC MANAGEMENT REFORM IN AN INTERNATIONAL CONTEXT , 2003 .

[12]  Hans de Bruijn,et al.  Managing Performance in the Public Sector , 2002 .

[13]  David N. Ammons.  Performance Measurement and Managerial Thinking , 2002 .

[14]  J. Halligan,et al.  Reforming public and corporate governance : management and the market in Australia, Britain and Korea , 2002 .

[15]  M. Barzelay.  The New Public Management , 2019 .

[16]  Dall W. Forsythe.  Quicker, Better, Cheaper? Managing Performance in American Government. , 2001 .

[17]  C. Pollitt.  Integrating Financial Management and Performance Management , 2001 .

[18]  Elaine Morley,et al.  Comparative Performance Measurement , 2001 .

[19]  J. Rabin,et al.  Performance Based Budgeting , 2001 .

[20]  J. Halligan.  Comparing Public Sector Reform in the OECD , 2001 .

[21]  C. Pollitt,et al.  Evaluating public management reforms: an international perspective , 2001 .

[22]  Per Lægreid,et al.  New public management : the transformation of ideas and practice , 2001 .

[23]  Brendan C. Nolan.  Public Sector Reform: An International Perspective , 2001 .

[24]  C. Talbot.  Measuring Performance of Government Departments - international developments , 2001 .

[25]  M. O'Donnel,et al.  Performance-Based Pay in the Australian Public Service , 2000 .

[26]  H. Hatry.  Performance Measurement , 1999 .

[27]  C. Talbot.  Public Performance - towards a new model? , 1999 .

[28]  Beryl A. Radin,et al.  The Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA): Hydra-Headed Monster or Flexible Management Tool? , 1998 .

[29]  Louis C. Gawthrop.  Public Service and Democracy: Ethical Imperatives for the 21st Century , 1998 .

[30]  N. Carr.  Quicker, better, cheaper. , 1997, Nursing standard (Royal College of Nursing (Great Britain) : 1987).

[31]  K. König.  On the critique of new public management , 1996 .

[32]  G. Bouckaert.  Measurement of public sector performance: Some European perspectives , 1996 .

[33]  Norman Flynn,et al.  Public sector management in Europe , 1996 .

[34]  F. Thompson,et al.  Managerial reform and professional empowerment in the public service , 1996 .

[35]  R. Behn.  The Big Questions of Public Management , 1995 .

[36]  Geert Bouckaert,et al.  The Enduring Challenges in Public Management: Surviving and Excelling in a Changing World , 1995 .

[37]  Tony Cutler,et al.  Managing the Welfare State: The Politics of Public Sector Management , 1994 .

[38]  Christopher Pollitt,et al.  Managerialism and the Public Services: Cuts or Cultural Change in the 1990S? , 1993 .

[39]  Neil Carter,et al.  How Organisations Measure Success: The Use of Performance Indicators in Government , 1992 .

[40]  C. Hood.  A PUBLIC MANAGEMENT FOR ALL SEASONS , 1991 .

[41]  G. Bouckaert.  Public productivity in retrospective , 1991 .

[42]  Martin Cave,et al.  Output and Performance Measurement in Government: The State of the Art , 1990 .

[43]  Geert Bouckaert,et al.  The history of the productivity movement , 1990 .

[44]  Kenneth L. Kraemer,et al.  Public management : public and private perspectives , 1983 .

[45]  Donald C. Kull.  Productivity Programs in the Federal Government , 1978 .

[46]  F. C. Mosher,et al.  Democracy and the public service , 1968 .

[47]  H. Finer.  Administrative Responsibility in Democratic Government , 1941 .