The use of performance information in decision-making is a management behavior that has received much attention in public administration research and practice. This article seeks to contribute to a better understanding of this behavior. It conducts a systematic review of 25 recently published empirical studies that have examined drivers of performance information use. Analyzing these studies, which were selected on the basis of their definition of purposeful data use, the article identifies factors that have repeatedly shown a positive impact: measurement system maturity, stakeholder involvement, leadership support, support capacity, innovative culture, and goal clarity. This systematic analysis also uncovers less conclusive variables; findings which are highly relevant for future studies. Based on the review, the article suggests directions for further research endeavors, including theoretical and methodological propositions.

This article examines the use of performance information by public managers. It conceptualizes purposeful data use as a type of extra-role behaviour which requires additional effort on the part of the managers and which is not extrinsically rewarded. The article sheds light on one potential antecedent of performance information use -the motivation of the users. It argues that we can observe high levels of data use if managers driven by public service motivation (PSM) work under transformational leaders. Using a needs-supply perspective on supervisors and followers, we suggest that there is a PSM-leadership fit which fosters the performance of this extra-role behaviour. The article is based on data from German local government and its findings contribute to the literatures on PSM as well as on performance management. INTRODUCTIONPerformance measurement has affected the management of public organizations worldwide. Data on the efficiency, quality, and effectiveness of public services must be systematically collected and reported by public administrations ( Research on performance information use is on the rise. There are about two dozen articles which have studied variations of purposeful performance information use (Kroll 2012). These articles mainly used linear, additive models to uncover and compare the direct effects of different variables on the managers' use of performance data. This approach has been useful for structuring the research field and for distinguishing between crucial variables and unimportant factors. However, in order to improve our understanding of real life public management decision-making, we might need to further specify our models by using moderators ('interactions') and mediators ('indirect effects'). As Frazier et al. (2004, p. 116) concluded, 'the identification of important moderators [and mediators] of relations between predictors and outcomes indicates the maturity and sophistication of a field of inquiry'.This article focuses on one antecedent of performance information use that has not received much attention -a manager's motivation and values. We base our argument on the premise that the use of performance data demands extra effort from the managers and is a cognitive process which is not extrinsically rewarded (Moynihan et al. 2012a).

The GPRA Modernization Act of 2010 provides the latest chapter in a history of US federal performance reforms that have largely failed to meet expectations. Will the Modernization Act be any different? This paper offers an early systematic assessment, and the results provide grounds for optimism. Managerial use of performance data was an explicit goal of the Modernization Act, a goal that previous federal reforms failed to achieve. The Act established a new series of performance routines to encourage performance information use. Our analysis of GAO survey data shows that as federal managers experience those routines, they are more likely to report using performance data to make decisions. Specifically, routines centered around the pursuit of cross-agency priority goals, the prioritization of a small number of agency goals, and data-driven reviews are all associated with higher rates of performance information use. We also find that managers in better-run data-driven reviews also report using performance data at higher levels.

No abstract

Training is much discussed but rarely studied in public management. Using multiple waves of survey data, the authors examine the effects of training on the implementation of performance management reforms in the U.S. federal government, asking whether those exposed to training are more likely to use performance data and strategic goals when making decisions. Training is positively associated with reform implementation, but there is little evidence that this association can be explained by the development of specific capacities to overcome performance management challenges. The findings offer two implications for the practice and study of training. The authors propose that training is likely to succeed if it is designed and funded to close specific capacity gaps needed for successful reform implementation. However, it is also necessary to better understand alternative causal mechanisms by which training facilitates reform implementation, such as explaining and justifying reforms. Training can facilitate the implementation of new policies by providing information about the policies, justifying why they are needed, and giving employees the capacity to put the new policies in place. Using training to build specific employee capacities is more complex, resource intensive, and rare than using training to provide information and justify reforms. Effective training in government requires not just more resources but also better understanding of the specific capacities needed and how to create them—research can help by identifying the most significant capacity gaps in policy implementation.

This article examines the use of performance information by public managers. It reviews literature on the impact of attitudes and social norm and puts forward a psychological-cognitive model based on the theory of planned behavior. The article finds support for this model emphasizing that performance data use is a goal-directed, reasoned action. Another critical result is that managers who consciously intend to use performance data also make sure that the data in their division are of good quality which, in turn, fosters information use. These findings indicate that-in addition to organizational routines-cognitive factors are promising starting points for interventions to foster managers' data use. The article is based on survey data from German cities.

No abstract

What most of the studies have in common is their understanding of what performance information is. Th is, in turn, is infl uenced by the New Public Management wave that contributed to diff use performance management practices worldwide (Bouckaert and Halligan 2008; Pollitt and Bouckaert 2004). Th e fi rst part of this shared understanding refers to the multiple dimensions of the concept of performance. Instead of focusing only on the inputs, attention is also drawn to the outputs, effi ciency, quality, and outcomes of public services. Th e second part focuses on the synoptic management routine that leads to the systematic collection and reporting of the data (de Lancer Julnes et al. 2007;Hatry 2006;Van Dooren, Bouckaert, and Halligan 2010). 1 I therefore refer to this type of data as routine performance information.Th ere is another type of performance data that has thus far been largely overlooked: nonroutine information. Th ere has always been performance feedback about the work of public organizations. If something went wrong in a public organization, customers complained, interest groups called, other public entities sent letters or e-mails, the media showed up, or politicians chastised administrators. Th is kind of feedback is concerned with the performance of public services, and it also addresses outputs and outcomes (namely, what is done by Th e literature on performance information use explains how public managers deal with mainly quantitative data that are systematically collected and formally reported. Th is article argues that such a narrow understanding is incomplete, as it excludes all kinds of nonroutine performance information, including verbal, ad hoc, and qualitative feedback. To understand how responsive public managers are to performance feedback, alternative sources of performance information need to be taken into account. A literature review suggests considering two important sources of nonroutine feedback: organizational insiders and relevant external stakeholders. Using survey data from German local government, this article shows that public managers prefer to use nonroutine feedback over routine data from performance reports. Furthermore, a regression analysis indicates that diff erent sources of performance information require diff erent determinants to trigger their use. Th is fi nding is essential because it suggests that explanations of performance information use can covary with the information source studied. O ne of the few indisputable facts about performance management is that the amount of available performance information has increased within the past few years. Current research on organizational performance, therefore, has been devoted to the fi nal stage of the management cycle: the use of performance data (Moynihan 2008; Van Dooren, Bouckaert, and Halligan 2010; Van Dooren and Van de Walle 2008). When speaking of "use," students of performance management are usually referring to the impact of performance information on decision making (Moynihan and Pandey types of performan...