Performance management in the local public sector in France: an administrative rather than a political model

Abstract

The purpose of this research is to analyse and characterise the practices of French local authorities in the field of performance management. It sets out to do so, as a first step, by putting forward a theoretical analytical framework of the different models of local performance management. It then goes on to draw on this framework and test it empirically in order to understand the nature of the French model of local performance management. The results of our research demonstrate the existence of a French, "performance administration" type model evident in the trends common to French local authorities with regard to the instrumental and methodological content and the methods of steering public performance. Notes for practitioners The managerial and practical contributions of this research on local performance initiatives are twofold. First of all, it will provide an analytical and evaluative framework for this type of initiative, not only structured around planning, accountability and evaluation tools but also around steering methods. Secondly, this study makes it possible to take stock of and characterise French practices in the field and their limitations compared to more mature international practices. Thus, a local authority adopting this path can therefore draw on this study to determine the scope and structure of the tools to be rolled out, depending on the purpose followed, be it administrative and/or political.

Agencification, policy reversal and the reforms of the French health care system

“…The 2009 Health Care Act reinforced the role of the hospital director at the expense of hospital board members; the former is appointed by the central government rather than elected by their peers. As Favoreu et al (2015) suggest, French reforms are organized around performance management as a system of rules, novel accounting mechanisms to provide fair compensation to care providers (hence, the extensive use of DRGs, with the penetration rate of 100 percent which is the highest in Europe), performance evaluation and central steering methods (e.g., regional and national expenditure targets, pay-for-performance contracts for care providers; government-set fees for medical procedures, management by objective) rather than around entrepreneurship, competition, and marketization, all of which produced very modest returns (Moran, 2016).…”

Public Sector Performance Assessment:

“…A conflict exists between short-term quantitative targets and qualitative targets (Verbeeten, 2008). Despite recent advances, the institutional traditions and bureaucratic legacy contribute to the maintenance of hierarchical and legalistic structures, not with standing the international diffusion of the NPM doctrine (Favoreu, et al, 2015), which suggests a further discussion of indicators (Jääskeläinen, & Laihonen, 2014) and the need for systems to effectively manage public services (Arnaboldi, et al, 2015).…”

Structures and functions of complex evaluation systems: comparison of six Central and Eastern European countries

“…Reducing red tape is also among the highlighted benefits (Oh and Lee, 2020). The use, non-use, advantages and limitations of evaluation are discussed in the context of bureaucracies and political authorities (Kudo, 2003), local governments (Favoreu et al, 2015) and national parliaments (Speer et al, 2015).…”