Performance measurement methods in the public sector

• Autorzy: Olga Gajda-Lüpke
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The notion of performance measurement (PM) in the public sector emerged in the framework of the New Public Management paradigm and public management reforms in industrialised as well as in developing countries. The paper discusses the following issues regarding PM - the definition of performance and types of measures, purpose of the PM and possible threats while applying PM. Firstly, as regards the types of measures - it is argued that measures of efficiency and effectiveness should be preferred over output measures Secondly, the purposes of PM are: informing users in the budget cycle, better planning, improved management, increased transparency and last but not least PM can motivate future performance. Thirdly, concerning the threats to the performance measurement: gaming, imprecise objectives and unprepared transfer of the new management system can make PM unreliable. The purpose of this paper is to overview and assess the recent developments concerning performance measurement and its methodology. It is also meant to add to the discussion on performance budgeting at the moment of the evaluation of Poland's first performance budget in 2008. (original abstract)

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Measuring work productivity; Efficiency measurement; Public sector; Effectiveness; Hazard

PL

Mierzenie wydajności pracy; Pomiar efektywności; Sektor publiczny; Efektywność; Hazard

• Czasopismo: The Poznań University of Economics Review
• Rocznik: 2009
• Tom: 9
• Numer: nr 1
• Strony: 67--88

Twórcy

autor

Olga Gajda-Lüpke

• European Parliament

Bibliografia

• Ammons D. N. and Rivenbark W. C. (2008), Factors Influencing the Use of Performance Data to Improve Municipal Services: Evidence from the North Carolina Benchmarking Project, Public Administration Review, March/April, pp. 304-318.
• Barzelay M. (2001), The New Public Management: Improving Research and Policy Dialogue, University of California Press, pp. 156-171.
• Behn R. D. (2003), Why Measure Performance? Different Purposes Require Different Measures, Public Administration Review, September/October, vol. 63, no. 5, pp. 586-606.
• Bevan G. and Hood C. (2005), What is Measured and What Matters: Targets and Gaming in the English Public Health Care System, The Public Services Programme Discussion Paper Series, no. 0501, December 2005, Economic and Social Research Council.
• Blöndal J. R. (2004), Issues in Accrual Budgeting, OECD Journal on Budgeting, vol. 4, no. 1, OECD 2004, pp. 103-119.
• Caiden N. and Caiden G. E. (2006), Improving Government Performance, Review of the Book, High-Performance Government: Structure, Leadership, Incentives, R. Klitgaard, P.C. Light (eds.), Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2005, Public Administration Review, January/February, pp. 139-142.
• Curristine T. (2005), Performance Information in the Budget Process: Results of the OECD 2005 Questionnaire, OECD Journal on Budgeting, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 88-131.
• EC (2000), Commission of the European Communities, Reforming the Commission, A White Paper, part I, vol. I, COM(2000) 200 final/2, Brussels, 2000.04.05.
• EC (2004), Commission of the European Communities, Communication from the Commission. Completing the Reform Mandate: Progress Report and Measures to be Implemented in 2004, Brussels, .02.10, COM(2004) 93 Final.
• EC (2007b), Commission of the European Communities, Annual Activity Reports of the European Commission, http://ec.europa.eu/atwork/synthesis/aar/index_en.htm.
• EC (2007b), European Commission, Directorate-General for Economic and Financial Affairs, site consulted 2008.07.29. http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/sg_pact_fiscal_policy/fiscal_policy528_en.htm.
• ECA (2008), European Court of Auditors, Special Report No 5/2008. The European Union's agencies: Getting results, adopted by the ECA on 2008.06.05.
• EU (2002), Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation Applicable to the General Budget of the European Communities, Official Journal of the European Communities, L 248 of 2002.09.16, as last amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 1525/2007 of 17 December 2007 L 343 9 27.12.2007.
• EU (2007), consolidated version of the following documents:
• - Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (Official Journal of the European Communities L 248, 2002.09.16, p. 1),
• - Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1995/2006 of 13 December 2006, Official Journal of the European Communities L 390 1 2006.12.30,
• - Council Regulation (EC) No 1525/2007 of 17 December 2007, Official Journal of the European Communities L 343 9 27.12.2007.12.27,
• - Corrigendum, Official Journal of the European Communities L 25, 2003.01.30, p. 43 (1605/2002),
• - Corrigendum, Official Journal of the European Communities L 99, 2007.04.14, p. 18 (1605/2002),
• - Corrigendum, Official Journal of the European Communities L 48, 2008.02.22, p. 88 (1995/2006) http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CONSLEG:2002 R1605:20071227:EN:PDF.
• Eurostat (2008), Total general government expenditure (% of GDP), overview 1996-2007, (Website consulted 2008.08.05), http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page?_page-id=1996,39140985&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL&screen=detailref&language=en&product=REF_TB_government_statistics&root=REF_TB_government_statistics/t_gov/t_gov_a/tec00023.
• Hood C. (2007), The Numbers Game, Ethos, Issue One, Spring, pp. 32-35.
• IFAC (2008), International Federation of Accountants, 2008 IFAC Handbook of International Public Sector Accounting Pronouncements, April, International Federation of Accountants.
• KPRM (2007), Kancelaria Prezesa Rady Ministrow, Departament Budżetu Zadaniowego, Raport Budżet zadaniowy, t. I. Budżet zadaniowy na rok 2008, Warszawa 2007.
• Lubińska T., Strąk T., Lozano-Platonoff A., Będzieszak M. (2007), Metodologiczne i wdrożeniowe problemy zastosowania budżetu zadaniowego, Ekonomista, no. 5/2007, pp. 703-716.
• Lubińska T. ed. (2007), Budżet zadaniowy w Polsce. Reorientacja z wydatkowania na zarządzanie pieniędzmi publicznymi, Warszawa, Difin.
• Lubińska T., Strąk T., Lozano-Platonoff A., Będzieszak M., Godek M. (2008), Performance Budgeting in Poland, to be printed in Revue Française De Finances Publiques, Paris.
• Melkers J., Willoughby K. (2005), Models of Performance-Measurement Use in Local Governments: Understanding Budgeting, Communication, and Lasting Effects, Public Administration Review, March/April, vol. 65, no. 2, pp. 180-190.
• Nicholson-Crotty S., Theobald N.A., Nicholson-Crotty J. (2006), Disparate Measures: Public Managers and Performance-Measurement Strategies Organizational Performance, Public Administration Review, January/February, pp. 101-113.
• OECD (2007a), Performance Budgeting in OECD Countries, OECD.
• OECD (2007b), Towards Better Measurement of Government, OECD Working Papers on Public Governenace 2007/01, OECD Publishing doi: 10.1787/301575636734.
• OECD (2008a), Economic Glossary, website consulted 2008.08.05. http://www.oecd.org/glossary/0,3414,en_2649_34109_1968510_1_1_1_1,00.html.
• OECD (2008b), Glossary of Statistical Terms, website consulted on 2008.09.04. http://stats.oecd.org/glossary/detail.asp?ID=1068.
• OECD (2008c), webpage consulted on 2008.09.04. http://www.oecd.org/countrieslist/0,3351,en_33873108_33844430_1_1_1_1_1,00.html