Current state of public sector performance management in seven selected countries

Abstract

If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. AbstractPurpose -This paper seeks to extend the analysis of performance management regimes by Bouckaert and Halligan to other countries in order to contribute to the developing theory of forms and challenges in public sector performance management. Design/methodology/approach -The state of performance management and the context in which it has evolved is assessed in seven different countries using dimensions drawn from Bouckaert and Halligan's work along with elements from earlier work by Pollitt and Bouckaert. These are summarized in a table and comparisons made to generate additional insights into the factors that influence the shape and speed of public management evolution. Findings -The paper finds that the Bouckaert and Halligan framework for analyzing public sector performance management is useful, albeit with some modifications. Specifically, it finds that administrative culture is a key factor influencing the speed of reform and that the attitude of elites (politicians and civil servants, in most cases) is also a vital piece of the puzzle that was not included in Bouckaert and Halligan, but did appear in the earlier framework of Pollitt and Bouckaert. It also finds evidence that economic and political crises occurring together accelerate the introduction of integrated performance management systems, but that trust in government does not appear to be a significant factor. Finally, the paper observes that, absent political crisis/commitment, governments will prioritise "external" performance measures such as customer service, participation and transparency objectives over "internal" performance measures such as financial, staff management and whole of government reporting. Originality/value -The countries studied provide a rare insight into lesser-known performance management regimes and the use of the Bouckaert and Halligan framework allows for comparisons to earlier (and future) research. The findings will be of interest to scholars in public administration reform and performance management.

Indonesian Local Government’s Accountability and Performance: the Isomorphism Institutional Perspective

“…Currently, one of the indicators of government performance accountability measurement is LAKIP (Permendagri number 34 of 2011). LAKIP was originally created as an annual performance report that requires government agencies to provide an overview of mission, vision, strategic objectives, and key performance indicators and provide mechanisms for linking key performance indicators to goals and organization budgets (Rhodes et al, 2012). However, LAKIP is currently one of the assessment criteria of successful local government performance by the central government.…”

Developing Civil Servants’ Commitment to Share Knowledge and Implement Cost Reduction Policy: The Perspective of Malaysian Public Sector

“…If the ruling party is not the one that they vote, civil servants incline to spend most of the time in the office condemning ruling government and having debate with those who favour the ruling government. This phenomenon is not healthy and if not controlled could lead to lower productivity (Rhodes et al, 2013).…”

“…Yao, Kam and Chan (2007) supported this by saying that senior management in the public administration sector should be made more aware of what knowledge management can do to help improve organizational efficiency and effectiveness. Rhodes, Biondi, Gomes, Melo, Ohemeng, Perez-Lopez, Rossi and Sutiyono (2013), when comparing the performance of public sector in Brazil, Italy, Portugal, Spain, Ghana, Indonesia and Ireland, found that administrative culture and the attitudes of elites are critical determinants of public sector performance.…”

Performance Management of IT in Public Administrations: A Literature Review on Driving Forces, Barriers and Influencing Factors

“…In contrast, public administrations are still facing big challenges concerning the implementation and use of IT PM concepts [4][5][6][7][8]. How IT PM can be implemented and used in public administrations is still an under-researched field [9].…”