1. bookVolume 8 (2015): Issue 2 (December 2015)
    Issue Title: Towards Meaningful Measurement: Performance Management at the Crossroads of Internal Efficiency and Social Impacts, Issue Editors: Juraj Nemec, Gyorgy Hajnal Wouter van Dooren Jarmo Vakkuri Aleksander Aristovnik
Journal Details
License
Format
Journal
eISSN
1338-4309
ISSN
1337-9038
First Published
03 Aug 2009
Publication timeframe
2 times per year
Languages
English
Open Access

When will we ever learn ?

Published Online: 29 Jan 2016
Volume & Issue: Volume 8 (2015) - Issue 2 (December 2015) - Issue Title: Towards Meaningful Measurement: Performance Management at the Crossroads of Internal Efficiency and Social Impacts, Issue Editors: Juraj Nemec, Gyorgy Hajnal Wouter van Dooren Jarmo Vakkuri Aleksander Aristovnik
Page range: 149 - 170
Journal Details
License
Format
Journal
eISSN
1338-4309
ISSN
1337-9038
First Published
03 Aug 2009
Publication timeframe
2 times per year
Languages
English
Abstract

This paper puts forward the argument that Performance Measurement Systems (PMSs) foster rational, self-interested behaviour and vested values at all levels within organisations, which weakens moral barriers preventing fraud, fabrication of data and bribery. It argues that the longer a PMS is in operation, the greater the probability that rational self-interested behaviour in conflict with fundamental values and goals will be consolidated, aggravated and disseminated within organisations that operate within public welfare policy. If implemented, common incentives aimed at counteracting undesirable behaviour aggravate and speed up this process rather than reversing it. In a worst-case scenario, PMSs are the first step toward corruption, even though PMSs have been implemented with the good intention of improving public policy and strengthening accountability.

Keywords

Argyris, C. 1990. “The Dilemma of Implementing Controls: The Case of Managerial Accounting.” Accounting Organizations and Society 15(6), 503 - 511.Search in Google Scholar

Arthur, J. B. 1994. “Effects of Human Resource Systems on Manufacturing Performance and Turnover.” Academy of Management Journal 3(3), 670 - 687. Baker, G. 2002. “Distortion and Risk in Optimal Incentive Contracts.” The Journal of Human Resources 37(4), 728 - 751.Search in Google Scholar

Behn, R. D. 2003. “Why Measure Performance ? Diff erent Purposes Require Diff erent Measures.” Public Administration Review 63(5), 586 - 606.Search in Google Scholar

Berliner, J. S. 1956. “A Problem in Soviet Business Administration.” Administrative Science Quarterly 1(1), 86 - 101.Search in Google Scholar

Bevan, G. and C. Hood. 2006. “What’s Measured is what Matters: Targets and Gaming in the English Public Health System.” Public Administration 84(3), 517 - 538.Search in Google Scholar

Bouckaert, G. and J. Halligan. 2008. Managing Performance: International Comparisons. New York: Routledge.10.4324/9780203935958Search in Google Scholar

Caroll, J. S. et al. 2006. “Naturalistic Decision Making and Organizational Learning in Nuclear Power Plants: Negotiating Meaning between Managers and Problem Investigation Teams.” Organisation Studies 27, 1037 - 1057.10.1177/0170840606065709Search in Google Scholar

Chan, H. S. and J. Gao. 2009. “Putting the Cart before the Horse: Accountability or Performance.” The Australian Journal of Public Administration 68(S1), S51-S61.Search in Google Scholar

Chan, H. S. and J. Gao. 2008. “Performance Measurement in Chinese Local Government.” Chinese Law and Government 41(2 - 3), 4 - 9.Search in Google Scholar

de Bruijn, H. 2002. “Performance Measurement in the Public Sector: Strategies to Cope with the Risk of Performance Measurement.” The International Journal of Public Sector Management 15(7), 578 - 594.Search in Google Scholar

Dur, R. and R. Zoutenbier. 2014. “Working for a Good Cause.” Public Administration Review 74(2), 144 - 155.Search in Google Scholar

Evans, T. and J. Harris. 2004. “Street-Level Bureaucracy, Social Work and the (Exaggerated) Death of Discretion.” British Journal of Social Work 34, 871 - 895.Search in Google Scholar

Evetts, J. 2009. “New Professionalism and New Public Management: Changes, Continuities and Consequences.” Comparative Sociology 8, 247 - 266.Search in Google Scholar

Frey, B. S. et al. 2013. “Organizational Control Systems and Pay-for-Performance in the Public Sector.” Organizational Studies 34(7), 949 - 972.Search in Google Scholar

Fryer, B. S. et al. 2009. “Performance Management in the Public Sector.” International Journal of Public Sector Management 22(6), 478 - 498.Search in Google Scholar

Gao, J. 2010. “Hitting the Target but Missing the Point: The Rise of Non-missioned- Based Targets in Performance Measurement of Chinese Local Governments.” Administration & Society, 42(IS), 565 - 765.Search in Google Scholar

Gao, J. 2009. “Governing by Goals and Numbers: A Case Study in the Use of Performance Measurement to Build State Capacity in China.” Public Administration and Development 29, 21 - 31.Search in Google Scholar

Gravelle, H. et al. 2010. “Doctor Behavior under Pay for Performance Contract: Treating, Cheating and Case Finding ?” The Economic Journal 120 (February), F129-F136.Search in Google Scholar

Hamilton, L. et al. 2013. “Improving Accountability through Expanded Measures of Performance.” Journal of Educational Administration 51(4), 453 - 475.Search in Google Scholar

Johansson, V. 2015. “Policy Networks: A Th reat to Procedural and Expert-Based Decision Making and the Quality of Public Risk Decisions ?” International Journal of Critical Infrastructure Protection 9, 3 - 12.Search in Google Scholar

Johansson, V. 2012. “Negotiating Bureaucrats.” Public Administration 90(4), 1032 - 1046.Search in Google Scholar

Johansson, V. and L. Lindgren (eds). 2013. Uppdrag off entlig granskning [Mission public scrutiny]. Lund: Studentlitteratur.Search in Google Scholar

Johansson, V. and S. Montin. 2014. “What if Performance Accountability Engenders Distrust ?” Urban Research & Practice 7(2), 213 - 227.Search in Google Scholar

Jones, B. D. 2003. “Bounded Rationality and Political Science: Lessons from Public Administration and Public Policy.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 13(4), 395 - 412.Search in Google Scholar

Kallio, K.-M. and T. J. Kallio. 2014. “Management-by-Results and Performance Measurement in Universities: Implications for Work Motivation.” Studies in Higher Education 39(4), 574 - 589.Search in Google Scholar

Klein, G. 2008. “Naturalistic Decision Making.” Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 50(3), 456 - 460.Search in Google Scholar

Lapsley, I. 2008. “The NPM Agenda: Back to the Future.” Finical Accountability & Management 24(1), 77 - 96.Search in Google Scholar

Lewis, M. J. and P. Triantafi llou. 2012. “From Performance Measurement to Learning: A New Source of Governmental Overload ?” International Review of Administrative Sciences 78(4), 597 - 614.Search in Google Scholar

Lingard, B. and S. Sellar. 2013. “‘Catalyst Data’: Perverse Systemic Eff ects of Audit and Accountability in Australian Schooling.” Journal of Education Policy 28(5), 634 - 656.Search in Google Scholar

Lipshitz, R. et al. 2001. “Focus Article: Taking Stock of Naturalistic Decision Making.” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process 14, 331 - 352.Search in Google Scholar

Lipsky, M. 1980. Street-Level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Services. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.10.2307/1288305Search in Google Scholar

Mannion, R. and J. Braithwaite. 2012. “Unintended Consequences of Performance in Health Care: 20 Salutary Lessons from the English National Healthcare.” Internal Medicine Journal 42:5, 569 - 574. Search in Google Scholar

March, J. and J. P. Olsen. 2004. “The Logic of Appropriateness.” Working Paper 04 / 08. Oslo: Center for European studies, University of Oslo.Search in Google Scholar

May, P. J. and S. Winter. 2007. “Politicians, Managers, and Street-Level Bureaucrats: Infl uence on Policy Implementation.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 19, 453 - 476.Search in Google Scholar

Maynard, A. 2012. “The Power and Pitfalls of Payment for Performance.” Health Economics 21, 3 - 12.Search in Google Scholar

Merchant, K. A. 1990. “The Effects of Financial Controls on Data Manipulation and Management Myopia.” Accounting, Organizations and Society 14(4), 297 - 313.Search in Google Scholar

Meyers, M. and S. Vorsanger. 2007. “Street-Level Bureaucrats and the Implementation of Public Policy.” In G. Peters and J. Pierre (eds). The Handbook of Public Administration. London: Sage, 153 - 165.Search in Google Scholar

Moynihan, D. P. et al. 2011. “Performance Regimes Amidst Governance Complexity.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 21, i141-i155.Search in Google Scholar

Noordegraaf, M. 2007. “From ‘Pure’ to ‘Hybrid’ Professionalism: Present-Day Professionalism in Ambiguous Public Domains.” Administration & Society 39(6), 761 - 785.Search in Google Scholar

Noordegraaf, M. and W. Schinkel. 2011. “Professional Capital Contested: A Bourdieusian Analysis of Confl icts between Professionals and Managers.” Comparative Sociology 10, 97 - 125.Search in Google Scholar

Nutley, S. et al. 2012. “Scrutinizing Performance: How Assessors Reach Judgments about Public Services.” Public Administration 12(90), 869 - 885.Search in Google Scholar

Ordóñez, L. D. et al. 2009. “Goals Gone Wild: The Systematic Side Effects of Overprescribing Goal Setting.” Academy of Management Perception 23(1), 6 - 16.Search in Google Scholar

Osborne, D. and T. Gaebler. 1992. Reinventing Government: How the Entrepreneurial Spirit is Transforming the Public Sector. New York: Plume.Search in Google Scholar

Otley, D. 1999. “Performance Measurement: A Framework for Management Control System Research.” Management Accounting Research 10, 363 - 382.Search in Google Scholar

Perrin, B. 1998. “Eff ective Use and Misuse of Performance Measurement.” American Journal of Evaluation 19(3), 367 - 379.Search in Google Scholar

Phelps, R. P. 2011. “Teach to the Test ? Most of the Problems with Testing have one Surprising Source: Cheating by School Administrators and Teachers.” Wilson Quarterly 35(4), 38 - 42.Search in Google Scholar

Pidd, M. 2005. “Perversity in Public Service Performance Measurement.” International Journal of Productivity 54(5 / 6), 482 - 493.Search in Google Scholar

Pierre, J. and G. Peters. 2000. Governance, Politics and the State. London: MacMillan Press. Pollitt, C. 2013. “The Logics of Performance Management.” Evaluation 19(4), 346 - 363.Search in Google Scholar

Pollitt, C. et al. 2010. “Performance Regimes in Health Care: Institutions, Critical Junctures and the Logic of Escalation in England and the Netherlands.” Evaluation 16(1), 13 - 29.10.1177/1356389009350026Search in Google Scholar

Poulsen, B. 2009. “Competing Traditions of Governance and Dilemmas of Administrative Accountability: The Case of Denmark.” Public Administration 87(1), 117 - 131.Search in Google Scholar

Power, M. 1997. The Audit Society: Rituals of Verifi cation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Power, M. 2003. “Evaluating the Audit Explosion.” Law and Policy, 25(3), 185 - 202.Search in Google Scholar

Radin, B. 2006. Challenging the Performance Movement: Accountability, Complexity, and Democratic Values. Washington D.C.: Georgetown University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Ridgway, V. F. 1956. “Dysfunctional Consequences of Performance Measurements.” Administrative Science Quarterly 1(2), 240 - 247.Search in Google Scholar

Salomon, L. (ed.). 2002. The Tools of Government: A Guide to the New Governance. New York: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Schneider, A. and H. Ingram. 1990. “Behavior Assumptions of Policy Tools.” The Journal of Politics 52(2), 520 - 529.Search in Google Scholar

Simon, H. 2000. “Bounded Rationality in Social Sciences: Today and Tomorrow.” Mind and Society 1, 25 - 39.Search in Google Scholar

Simon, H. 1993. “Decision Making: Rational, Nonrational, and Irrational.” Educational Administration Quarterly 29(3), 392 - 411.Search in Google Scholar

Smith, P. 1995. “On the Unintended Consequences of Publishing Performance Data.” Public Sector 18(2), 277 - 310.Search in Google Scholar

Van Dooren, W. et al. 2010. Performance Management in the Public Sector. New York: Routledge.10.4324/9780203030806Search in Google Scholar

Van Thiel, S. and F. L. Leeuw. 2002. “The Performance Paradox in the Public Sector.” Public Performance and Management Review 25(3), 267 - 281.Search in Google Scholar

Wilson, D. et al. 2006. “‘What Gets Measured Gets Done’: Head Teachers’ Responses to the English Secondary School Performance Management.” Policy Studies 27(2), 153 - 171.Search in Google Scholar

Zsambok, C. and G. Klein. 1997. Naturalistic Decision Making. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum. Search in Google Scholar

Recommended articles from Trend MD

Plan your remote conference with Sciendo