New Public Management: Perspectives on Performance and the Use of Performance Information

Performance information is a key-element of NPM, but politicians and managers rarely use this information. On the basis of three case studies, this paper seeks to explain the use of the newly developed performance information. The paper argues that there is a distinction between the customer perspective and the citizen perspective on performance. NPM implies a customer and an internal perspective on performance. These perspectives may be relevant to managers, but politicians are primarily interested in a citizen perspective and a financial perspective. Two situations are identified in which governmental organizations more actively use performance information with a customer perspective and an internal perspective (as implied in NPM): (1) a crisis in the organization's internal processes with political and/or financial consequences; and (2) loose coupling of the performance reports to politicians and to managers, which stimulates the information use by both politicians and managers.

[1]  John Martin,et al.  Strategic performance management: A balanced approach to performance management issues in local government , 2000 .

[2]  H. T. Bogt,et al.  The Application of Businesslike Planning and Control in Local Government: A Field Study of Eight Dutch Municipalities , 2001 .

[3]  I. Lapsley,et al.  Accounting, management and organizational change: A comparative study of local government , 2000 .

[4]  E. Jansen,et al.  New public management in Dutch local government , 2003 .

[5]  M. Christensen,et al.  A Two‐country Comparison of Public Sector Performance Reporting: The Tortoise and Hare? , 2001 .

[6]  C. Hood.  The “new public management” in the 1980s: Variations on a theme , 1995 .

[7]  Åge Johnsen,et al.  Implementation Mode and Local Government Performance Measurement: A Norwegian Experience , 1999 .

[8]  Stephen P. Osborne,et al.  Lessons from the health sector for public management , 2002 .

[9]  G. Hofstede.  Management Control of Public and Not-for-Profit Activities , 1981 .

[10]  Christopher Pollitt,et al.  CLARIFYING CONVERGENCE. Striking similarities and durable differences in public management reform , 2001 .

[11]  Jan-Erik Lane,et al.  New Public Management , 2021, Bangladesh Journal of Public Administration.

[12]  T. Bogt.  Performance evaluation styles in governmental organizations: How do professional managers facilitate politicians’ work? , 2003 .

[13]  Paul M Collier,et al.  The Power of Accounting: A Field Study of Local Financial Management in a Police Force , 2001 .

[14]  G. Jan van Helden,et al.  Accounting change in Dutch government: Exploring the gap between expectations and realizations☆ , 2000 .

[15]  R. Torstendahl,et al.  Public management and administrative reform in Western Europe , 1999 .

[16]  G. T. Budding,et al.  Accountability, environmental uncertainty and government performance: evidence from Dutch municipalities , 2004 .

[17]  T. J. Brignall,et al.  An Institutional Perspective on Performance Measurement and Management in the 'New Public Sector' , 2000 .

[18]  C. Pollitt.  The New Public Management in international perspective : An analysis of impacts and effects , 2005 .

[19]  K. Weick,et al.  Loosely Coupled Systems: A Reconceptualization , 1990 .

[20]  H. T. Bogt.  Politicians and output-oriented performance evaluation in municipalities , 2001 .