Performance measurement is not an end in itself. So why should public managers measure performance? Because they may find such measures helpful in achieving eight specific managerial purposes. As part of their overall management strategy, public managers can use performance measures to evaluate, control, budget, motivate, promote, celebrate, learn, and improve. Unfortunately, no single performance measure is appropriate for all eight purposes. Consequently, public managers should not seek the one magic performance measure. Instead, they need to think seriously about the managerial purposes to which performance measurement might contribute and how they might deploy these measures. Only then can they select measures with the characteristics necessary to help achieve each purpose. Without at least a tentative theory about how performance measures can be employed to foster improvement (which is the core purpose behind the other seven), public managers will be unable to decide what should be measured.Everyone is measuring performance. 1 Public managers are measuring the performance of their organizations, their contractors, and the collaboratives in which they participate. Congress, state legislatures, and city councils are insisting that executive-branch agencies periodically report measures of performance. Stakeholder organizations want performance measures so they can hold government accountable. Journalists like nothing better than a front-page bar chart that compares performance measures for various jurisdictions-whether they are average test scores for the city's schools or FBI uniform crime statistics for the state's cities. Moreover, public agencies are taking the initiative to publish compilations of their own performance measurements (Murphey 1999). A major trend among the nations that comprise the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, concludes Alexander Kouzmin (1999) of the University of Western Sydney and his colleagues, is "the development of measurement systems which enable comparison of similar activities across a number of areas," (122) and which "help to establish a performance-based culture in the public sector" (123). "Performance measurement," writes Terrell Blodgett of the University of Texas and Gerald Newfarmer of Management Partners, Inc., is "(arguably) the hottest topic in government today" (1996, 6).

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

No abstract

No abstract

Public managers do and should grope along. They need to have a clear sense of mission for their agency. But they will never know precisely how to realize these purposes. Every new management task confronts even the most experienced manager with a new organizational, political, and cultural situation. Consequently, the public manager cannot develop the perfect plan from the beginning. Rather, he or she must experiment with various initiatives, trying to determine what works and what does not. Meanwhile, the successes that result from some of these initiatives move the manager closer to his goal, create new capabilities for his organization, and help motivate his staff by demonstrating that they can be successful. There are thousands of management principles, and it is never obvious which ones apply in a particular managerial situation. Thus, every public manager must grope along.