Robert d behn why measure performance

After all, neither the act of mea- suring performance nor the resulting data accomplishes anything itself; only when someone uses these measures in some way do they accomplish something. For what pur- poses do—or might—people measure the performance of public agencies, public programs, nonprofit and for-profit contractors, or the collaboratives of public, nonprofit, and for-profit organizations that deliver public services?

Why measure performance? Because measuring perfor- mance is good. But how do we know it is good? Because business firms all measure their performance, and every- one knows that the private sector is managed better than. Robert D. Kennedy School of Government and the faculty chair of its executive program Driving Gov- ernment Performance. His research focuses on governance, leadership, and performance management.

He believes the most important perfor- mance measure is the last year the Boston Red Sox won the World Series. Email: [email protected]. So what should public agencies measure? Performance, of course. But what kind of performance should they measure, how should they measure it, and what should they do with these measurements? It helps citizens and customers judge the value that government creates for them. Nevertheless, imbedded in their proposals for designing effective performance measures, they suggest a number of different purposes: planning, evaluation, organizational learning, driving improvement efforts, decision making, resource allocation, control, facilitat- ing the devolution of authority to lower levels of the hi- erarchy, and helping to promote accountability Krav- chuck and Schack , , , , Performance measures can be used for multiple pur-.

Moreover, different people have different purposes. Legislators have different purposes than journalists. Stake- holders have different purposes than public managers. Consequently, I will focus on just those people who man- age public agencies. What purpose—exactly—is a public manager attempt- ing to achieve by measuring performance?

But that hardly answers the question. What will public manag- ers do with all of this reliable and valid information? Pro- ducing reliable and valid reports of government perfor- mance is no end in itself. All of the reliable and valid data about performance is of little use to public managers if they lack a clear idea about how to use them or if the data are not appropriate for this particular use.

So what, ex- actly, will performance measurement do, and what kinds of measures do public managers need to do this? Hatry offers one of the few enumerated lists of the uses of performance information. He suggests that public man- agers can use such information to perform ten different. My list is slightly different. From the diversity of rea- sons for measuring performance, I think public managers have eight primary purposes that are specific and distinct or only marginally overlapping4.

As part of their overall management strategy, the leaders of public agencies can use performance measurement to 1 evaluate; 2 control; 3 budget; 4 motivate; 5 promote; 6 celebrate; 7 learn; and 8 improve. This list could be longer or shorter. The other seven purposes are simply means for achieving this ultimate purpose.

Consequently, the choice of how many subpurposes—how many distinct means—to include is somewhat arbitrary. But my major point is not. Instead, let me emphasize: The leaders of public agencies can use performance measures to achieve a number of very differ- ent purposes, and they need to carefully and explicitly choose their purposes. Only then can they identify or cre- ate specific measures that are appropriate for each indi- vidual purpose.

Of the various purposes that others have proposed for measuring performance, I have not included on my list: plan- ning, decision making, modifying programs, setting per- formance targets, recognizing good performance, compar- ing performance, informing stakeholders, performance contracting, and promoting accountability.

Why not? Be- cause these are really subpurposes of one or more of the eight basic purposes. For example, planning, decision mak- ing, and modifying are implicit in two of my eight, more basic, purposes: budgeting and improving. The real reason that managers plan, or make decisions, or modify programs is to either reallocate resources or to improve future perfor- mance.

Similarly, the reason that managers set performance targets is to motivate, and thus to improve. To compare per- formance among jurisdictions is—implicitly but undeni- ably—to evaluate them. Recognizing good performance is designed to motivate improvements. Informing stakehold- ers both promotes and gives them the opportunity to evalu- ate and learn.

Performance contracting involves all of the eight purposes from evaluating to improving. And, depend-. Evaluation is the usual reason for measuring perfor- mance.

Try again later. Citations per year. Duplicate citations. The following articles are merged in Scholar. Their combined citations are counted only for the first article. Merged citations. This "Cited by" count includes citations to the following articles in Scholar. Add co-authors Co-authors. Follow this author. New articles by this author.

New citations to this author. View 2 excerpts, cites methods. The Debate Goes On. What is performance measurement for? Multiple uses of performance information within organizations. This article … Expand. View 1 excerpt, cites background. Traditionally, these systems were focused on financial measures such as sales, profits or return on investment.

In the … Expand. View 2 excerpts, cites background. Performance measurement for the e-government initiatives: a comparative study.

The main objective of performance measurement in public organizations is to support better decision-making by management, leading to improved outcome for the community, and to meet external … Expand. View 2 excerpts. Designing and implementing performance measurement systems in public contracts is not easy. Little evidence is available on what measures work better in producing managerial benefits. This study … Expand.

Evaluating Executive Performance in the Public Sector. The ability of a government organization to evaluate and reward executive performance is of critical importance if performance management systems are realistically expected to promote successful … Expand.

Evaluating performance is an important function in organizations and few decisions are made in organizations that are not subject to some sort of performance evaluation. Although it is possible in … Expand. The balanced scorecard--measures that drive performance. The key to meaningful advances in performance measurement in local government may lie in meeting the public interest challenge.

In this case, the challenge will be met not only by formulating … Expand.