The evolution of benchmarking in UK local authorities

Abstract

Explores issues surrounding the recent evolution of benchmarking in the UK public sector with particular regard to local authorities. Argues that what is being done in the name of benchmarking in UK local authorities is fundamentally different to the current understanding of benchmarking practice in the private sector. Despite these differences, and somewhat ironically, the development of benchmarking in the public sector pre-dates its popularity in the private sector. In the public sector, benchmarking is frequently in response to central government requirements, or is used for defensive reasons rather than striving for performance gains. These themes are captured in two new benchmarking typologies: compulsory and voluntary models of benchmarking. Concludes that: the reasons for benchmarking in the public sector are confused; pressures for accountability in the public sector may militate against real performance improvement; and an appropriate balance between the use of benchmarking for control and improvement purposes is yet to be achieved.

Institutional Logics in Police Performance Indicator Development: A Comparative Case Study of Spain and Finland

“…In practice, however, the interplay between institutional logics and KPIs is not clear: some KPI researchers have defended KPI use for benchmarking but taken benchmarking as a technique for dealing with legitimacy (Ammons et al, 2001;Ammons and Rivenbark, 2008;Bowerman, 1995Bowerman, , 2002Dorsch, and Yasin, 1998;Higgins et al, 2004;Hinton et al, 2000;Tillema, 2010). Further, multiple KPIs may be used in order for the PM and reporting to be relevant for the various stakeholders, and at the same time to manage the multiple institutional logics.…”

Os indicadores do saneamento medem a universalização em áreas de vulnerabilidade social?

“…Os diversos estudos que abordam o benchmarking em relação à sua aplicação no setor público, especificamente em relação a aspectos de governança local (BOVAIRD & LÖFFLER, 2002;BOWERMAN et al, 2002;DAVIS, 1998;DORSCH & YASIN, 1998) De forma semelhante, os indicadores de cobertura de água e esgotamento sanitário, atendimento de água e esgotamento sanitário, perdas e satisfação dos usuários serão aferidos e comparados em relação aos custos, números de empregados e adensamento urbano para realizar as metas previstas no horizonte temporal entre revisões tarifárias. São diversos os dados disponíveis acerca da cobertura de abastecimento e esgotamento sanitário em áreas legais, porém faltam indicadores adequados para medir disparidades de gestão e da situação do usuário nas questões da universalização (JULIANO et al, 2012a).…”

Public Sector Accounting Policy Reform in the Czech Republic: Experience from Local Governments (pilot)

“…There are many motivating factors for researching the aforementioned problems and tackle them to find appropriate directions, followed by creating or developing new solutions (searching for -e.g., efficiency, effectiveness, accountability…) like the use of benchmarking, contracting, financial performance, gap measurements, real value, transparency and accountability, financial position or health identification, etc. (Bowerman et al 2002, Andersen et al 2008, Soukopová 2009, Soukopová and Bakoš 2010, Vodáková 2012, Levine et al 2013, Vaceková 2013, Vaceková and Pavlík 2013, Siverbo 2014. In favour of the aforementioned, Guthrie (1998) points out that accrual information has moved to the position of an accurate assessment of the full cost of service provision and as an indicator of the efficiency of programme performance.…”