Internal and external use of performance information in public organizations: results from an international survey

Medical professionals’ responses to a DRG performance management system for hospital care in the Netherlands. Reinterpreting ‘perverse effects’, such as upcoding and patient selection, using arguments of professionalism and managerialism

“…Like other types of performance management systems, the intention of the Dutch DRG system is to stimulate improved performance of hospitals and medical professionals by arranging financial incentives, for example, performance-related reimbursement or remuneration (see, e.g., Hammerschmid, Van de Walle and Štimac 2013). However, the relationship between the incentives structure of a performance management system and the intended beneficial effects on performance is not always clear-cut in practice.…”

“…Viewing organizational processes from the perspective provided by a performance management system allows organizations to learn, improve, and innovate in their service provision and internal operations (De Bruijn 2007, Pen 2009, Hammerschmid, Van de Walle and Štimac 2013. In this respect, performance management does not only targets narrow process improvement, but also contributes to a more comprehensive understanding of policy changes and their effectiveness (Moynihan 2005a) Furthermore, feedback from performance management systems offer organizations an incentive to focus on their primary processes and core organizational performance (Osborne and Gaebler 1992, Johnsen 2005, Bevan and Hood 2006, Van Elsacker 2007.…”

The Implementation of Performance Management in European Central Governments: More a North-South than an East-West Divide

“…to include lower-level executives). In addition, other measures were taken to assure a high quality dataset based on the challenges of international comparative research (see Hammerschmid et al 2013a). Th is, however, also had its limitations due to the anonymity guaranteed to the respondents.…”

“…For the COCOPS research we distinguished between two broad types of performance information use: internal and external, a common distinction in current research on performance information use (see also Moynihan and Pandey 2010;Taylor 2011). Factor analyses published earlier (Hammerschmid et al 2013a) proved the robustness of distinguishing these two dimensions based on the eight items used in the COCOPS survey (see Figure 6). …”

“…A growing body of research has explored how public managers and politicians use performance information and has started to identify antecedents of such use (e.g. Moynihan and Pandey 2010;Van Dooren and Van de Walle 2008;Taylor 2011;Hammerschmid et al 2013a; for a systematic overview, see Kroll 2015). A striking feature of most of this research on performance management is a strong reliance on evidence from Anglo-Saxon countries, Scandinavia and a few other countries, such as the Netherlands, and an absence of empirical research evidence from other countries (for an overview see Boyne 2010b).…”