Managing performance: international and national trends barriers: entrepreneurial vs bureaucratic;...

FORUM AP, Roma, May 17th 2012

Professor Geert Bouckaert

Managing performance:

international and national trends

1.PI:Do we focus on the right things?

2.PI: Responsibility versus accountability

3.PI: Are we ready or not?

4.PI:Trust good versus distrust bad PIs

5.PI: Costs versus Benefits

6.PI: Supply versus Demand

7.PI: Use versus non-use (or abuse)

3

1.Performance and Focus

Input OutputActivity

Objectives

Effect

Needs

Trust

1.input/input: economy2.input/output: efficiency/productivity3.output/effect: effectiveness4.input/effect: cost-effectiveness5.effect/trust6.output/trust7.input/trust

7

6

5

4

321

Environment

1.Performance and Focus

Performance: What is our focus? And Why?

-the urgent or the important

-responsibility versus accountability

-depends on where you stand

Different PIs for different purposes

2.PI: Responsibility versus Accountability

RESPONSIBILITYRESPONSIBILITY

WEAK STRONG

NO

ACCOUNTABILITY

ACCOUNTABILITY

WEAK

STRONG

A

C1

C2

D1 D2

D3 D4

B1 B2

NO

Macro-level

Meso-level

Micro-level

Input Activity Output Effect/Outcome Trust




Executive

Politicians

Legislative

Politicians

Citizen/CustomerAdministration

(1)

(2)(3)

(4)

(5)(6)


New or renewed instruments

• 1 Performance budgets and performance audits

• 2.General Citizen Charter

• 3.Contracts

• 4.Specific charters, SLA, surveys (satisfaction)

• 5.Hearings around contracts and performance

• 6.Ombud


3.PI: Are we ready, or not?

• Performance administration

• Managements of performances

• Performance management

• Performance governance


• Organisational readiness checklist


Performance

Administration

Managements of

Performances

Performance

Management

Performance

Governance

Measurement

Incorporation

Use/non-use


MANAGEMENT BY INDICATORS

REQUIRES INDICATOR MANAGEMENT

-Guarantee Measurement + Incorporation +

Use

-Watch Costs and Benefits

-Match Supply and Demand

13

4.PI: Trust good versus distrust bad PIs

Legitimacy

Technical Features

(Validity & Reliability

Functionality

1

4

7

3

2

6

8

5

14

Functionality

Legitimacy

Technical features:

validity and reliability

optimum

1

1

1

0

A

B

C


15

1. Where are you now? (A)

2. Where would you like to be? (B)

3. How to get from A to B


• Selected

• Discussed

• Scored

• Evaluated


1. Whole of government indicators (means)

0

1

2

3

4

5

0 1 2 3 4 5

Utility

Feasib

ilit

y

Indicator 1

Indicator 2

Indicator 3

Indicator 4

Indicator 5

Indicator 6

Indicator 7

Indicator 8

Indicator 9

Indicator 10

Indicator 11

Indicator 12

Indicator 13

Indicator 14

Indicator 15


5.PI: costs versus benefits

WHY IS THE OBVIOUS NOT SO OBVIOUS?

CBA of Indicators:

Costs: creating, transferring, collecting, processing, storing,

making available, …

Benefits: comparing, registering change, improved

decisions, better allocations, transparency,

responsibility/accountability, learning, ...


ASSYMETRIES OF COSTS AND BENEFITS

COST:

Unconditional, immediate, undisputable, tangible

BENEFITS:

Conditional, not (always) immediate, disputable, intangible

Different Costs and different benefits for different actors


HOW TO CREATE A POSITIVE CBA?

-Reducing costs:

-Economy of providing and generating data

-Increasing Benefits:

-Increase level of needs/use (more demand);

-Avoid non-use (or abuse)

-Expand depth and scope (more supply)


Bouckaert & Halligan (2008) Managing Performance, International Comparisons, Routledge, London, p. 113.


HOW TO AVOID ZONES OF FRUSTRATION AND

MISMATCH?

-Shifting from supply (availability) feeding demand (needs)

to demand generating supply

-Organising demand (problem driven: savings, capacity,

quality, legitimacy, flexibility, mobility, …)

7.PI: Use versus Non-Use

• Incorporate

• Types of use: soft versus hard

• Context of use

• INCORPORATION

-Policy cycle

-Financial cycle

-Contract cycle

(Strategic)

plan Evaluation

Monitoring

Feedback

Feedback

Evaluation

contract

Implementing

contract

Design

contract

Policy cycle

Contract Cycle

Feedback

Audit

Accountancy

Budget

Financial Cycle

Van Dooren Wouter, Geert Bouckaert, John Halligan (2010) Performance Management in the Public Sector. Routledge: London, p. 85.

• USE

-To learn

-To steer and control

-To give account

To learn To steer&control To give account

Key question How to improve policy or

management?

How to steer and

control activities?

How to communicate

performance?

Focus Internal Internal External

Orientation Change/future Control/present Survival/past

Exemplary

Instruments

Strategic planning,

benchmarking, risk analysis,

business process reengineering

Monitors and

management

scorecards,

performance pay,

performance budgeting

league tables, citizen

charters and annual

reporting, performance

contracts

Van Dooren Wouter, Geert Bouckaert, John Halligan (2010) Performance Management in the Public Sector. Routledge: London, pp. 101.


HARD OR SOFT USE?

Van Dooren Wouter, Geert Bouckaert, John Halligan (2010) Performance Management in the Public Sector. Routledge: London, p.103.

27


Context of use

Q

t

O

I

(1)Q

t

O

I

(2)

28


Q

t

O

I

(3) Q

t

O

I

Q min

(4) Q

t

O

I

Q max

(5)


REASONS FOR NON-USE

-Insufficient quality

-Psychological barriers: satisficing and bounded rationality

-Cultural barriers: entrepreneurial vs bureaucratic; egalitarian vs hierarchical

-Institutional: balance of power; balance of professions

CONSEQUENCES OF NON-USE

-Over-claiming ‘best practices’

-Weak institutional memories


EFFECTS OF USING INDICATORS

-Functional behavioural effects:

-Learning and Innovation

-Steering and Control

-Responsibility and Accountability

-Dysfunctional behavioural effects:

-Conditionality for functional and dysfunctional effects

1.PI:Do we focus on the right things?

2.PI: Responsibility versus accountability

3.PI: Are we ready or not?

4.PI:Trust good versus distrust bad PIs

5.PI: Costs versus Benefits


7.PI: Use versus non-use (or abuse)

SOME REFERENCES

• Bouckaert Geert, Halligan John (2008) Managing performance, International comparisons. Routledge, London, 440 p.

• OECD (2009) Measuring Government Activity. OECD, Paris (Edited by Christopher Pollitt, Geert Bouckaert, and Wouter Van Dooren), pp. 130.

• Pollitt Christopher, Bouckaert Geert (2011, 3rd expanded ed.) Public Management Reform. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 367,

• Van Dooren Wouter, Geert Bouckaert, John Halligan (2010) Performance Management in the Public Sector. Routledge: London, pp. 208

K.U.Leuven

Public Management Institute Parkstraat 45 bus 3609

B-3000 Leuven

Belgium

0032 16 32 32 70

[email protected]

www.publicmanagement.be

Further information

Managing performance: international and national trends barriers: entrepreneurial vs bureaucratic;...

Documents

Transcript of Managing performance: international and national trends barriers: entrepreneurial vs bureaucratic;...