Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-6bb9c88b65-k72x6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-07-21T09:24:33.930Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

7 - Performance control and public organizations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 September 2009

By
Patrick Kenis
Edited by
George A. Boyne ,
Kenneth J. Meier ,
Laurence J. O'Toole, Jr.  and
Richard M. Walker
Patrick Kenis
Affiliation:
Professor at the Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences and also Head of the Department of Policy and Organization Studies Tilburg University, The Netherlands
George A. Boyne
Affiliation:
Cardiff University
Kenneth J. Meier
Affiliation:
Texas A & M University
Laurence J. O'Toole, Jr.
Affiliation:
University of Georgia
Richard M. Walker
Affiliation:
The University of Hong Kong
Get access

Summary

Introduction

This chapter is designed to contribute to the discussion on determining the performance of public organizations by investigating the relationship between performance control systems and performance. It cannot be assumed that performance control systems automatically lead to performance. Neither shall we assume that management control systems are the same as performance control. To do so would be a case of ‘managementism’ which has been described by Dubnick (2003: 9) as a phenomenon where ‘management is seen as the premium mobile that shapes and drives the basic logic of the common research agenda for contemporary Public Administration’. Consequently, we will demonstrate that different forms of performance control do exist. Which form is the most likely to contribute to performance depends on a number of conditions.

In this chapter, we first give a definition of control systems; second, present different types of performance control systems; and third, formulate propositions about how different control approaches contribute to organizational performance. In the last part we discuss the limitations and the opportunities from these insights in providing a solid basis for improving the performance of public organizations.

The definition of performance control and types of performance control

Performance control is defined here as ‘the process of monitoring performance, comparing it with some standards, and then providing rewards and adjustments’ (see Ouchi 1977: 97). This definition should not be misinterpreted, as has often been done, by equating it with performance management, management control systems, management accounting systems, organizational control and management control (Ashworth et al. 2002).

Information

Type
Chapter
Information
Public Service Performance
Perspectives on Measurement and Management
 , pp. 113 - 129
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Abernethy, M. A. and Stoelwinder, J. U. (1995) ‘The role of professional control in the management of complex organization’, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 20: 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ackoff, R. L. (1967) ‘Management misinformation systems’, Management Science, 14: 147–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alchian, A. A. and Demetz, H. (1972) ‘Production, information cost and economic organization’, American Economic Review, 61: 777–795.Google Scholar
Argyris, C. (1980) ‘Some limitations of the case method: Experiences in a management development program’, Academy of Management Review, 5: 291–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ashby, W. R. (1952) Design for a brain. New York, NY: Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Ashworth, R., Boyne, G. A. and Walker, R. M. (2002) ‘Regulatory problems in the public sector: Theories and cases’, Policy & Politics, 30: 195–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartlett, C. A. and Ghoshal, S. (1995) ‘Changing the role of top management: Beyond systems to people’, Harvard Business Review, 7(3): 132–142.Google Scholar
Birnbaum, R. (1990) ‘“How'm I doin?”: How college presidents assess their effectiveness’, Leadership Quarterly, 1: 25–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bohte, J. and Meier, K. J. (2000) ‘Goal displacement: Assessing the motivation for organizational cheating’, Public Administration Review, 60: 173–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyne, G. A. (2003a) ‘Sources of public service improvement: A critical review and research agenda’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 13: 367–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyne, G. A. (2003b) ‘What is public service improvement?’, Public Administration, 81: 211–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, J. S. and Duguid, P. (1991) ‘Organizational learning and communities of practice: Towards a unified view of working, learning, and innovation’, Organization Science, 2: 40–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brunsson, N. (1989) The organization of hypocrisy. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Campbell, D. J. and Lee, C. (1988) ‘Self-appraisal in performance evaluation: development versus evaluation’, Academy of Management Review, 13: 302–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chatman, J. A. (1991) ‘Matching people and organizations: selection and socialization in public accounting firms’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 36: 459–484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chenhall, R. H. (2003) ‘Management control systems design within its organizational context: Findings from contingency-based research and directions for the future’, Accounting, Organizations and Society 28: 127–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coplin, W. D., Merget, A. E. and Bourdeaux, C. (2002) ‘The professional researcher as change agent in the government-performance movement’, Public Administration Review, 62: 699–711.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cook, S. D. N. and Brown, J. S. (1999) ‘Bridging epistemologies: The generative dance between organizational knowledge and organizational knowing’, Organization Science, 10: 381–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Covaleski, M. A. and Dirsmith, M. W. (1996) ‘The budgetary process of power and politics’, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 11: 193–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Czarniawska-Joerges, B. (1988) ‘Dynamics of organizational control: The case of Berol Kemi Ab’, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 13: 415–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies, C. and Francis, A. (1974) ‘The many dimensions of performance measurement: There is more to performance than profits and growth’, Organizational Dynamics, 3: 51–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dermer, J. D. (1988) ‘Control and organizational order’, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 13: 25–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dubnick, M. J. (2003) Accountability and the promise of performance: In search of the mechanisms. Paper prepared for delivery at the 2003 annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, 28–31 August, Philadelphia, PA and Conference of the European Group of Public Administration (EGPA), 3–6 September, Lisbon, Portugal.Google Scholar
Follett, M. P. (1937) ‘The process of control’ in Gulick, L. and Urwick, L. (eds.), Papers on the science of administration. New York, NY: Institute of Public Administration, pp. 161–169.Google Scholar
Follett, M. P. (1951) Creative experience. New York, NY: Peter Smith.Google Scholar
Grean, G. (1967) ‘Role-making processes within complex organizations’ in Dunnette, M. D. (ed.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally, pp. 1201–1245.Google Scholar
Green, S. G. and Welsh, M. A. (1988) ‘Cybernetics and dependence: Reframing the control concept’, Academy of Management Review, 12: 287–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, H. C. (2003) ‘Understanding implementation: Street-level bureaucrats’ resources for reform', Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 13: 265–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hofstede, G. (1981) ‘Management control of public and not-for-profit activities’, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 6: 193–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P. (2004) ‘Strategy as practice: Recursiveness, adaptation, and practices-in-use’, Organization Studies, 25: 529–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahneman, D., Slovic, P. and Tversky, A. (1982) Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kenis, P. (2003) ‘Crisis in de gezondheidszorg: De wachtlijstproblematiek’, Bestuurskunde 12: 88–96.Google Scholar
Raaij, Korssen-van D. (2005) Balancing on network norms: A partial presentation of a study on control in Dutch health care networks. Paper presented at the EGOS Conference, Berlin.Google Scholar
Luhmann, N. (1973) Zweckbegriff und systemrationalitat. Frankfurt a.M: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Lynn, L. E. Jr. (2001) ‘The myth of the bureaucratic paradigm: What traditional public administration really stood for’, Public Administration Review, 61: 144–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lynn, L. E. Jr., Heinrich, C. J. and Hill, C. J. (2000) ‘Studying governance and public management: Challenges and prospects’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10: 233–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maynard-Moody, S. and Musheno, M. (2000) ‘State agent or citizen agent: Two narratives of discretion’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10: 329–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Metcalfe, L. (2001) ‘Reforming the European governance: old problems or new principles?’, International Review of Administrative Sciences, 67: 415–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, M. W. (2002) Rethinking Performance Measurement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Meyer, J. W. and Rowan, B. (1977) ‘Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony’, American Journal of Sociology, 83: 340–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyers, M. K., Riccucci, N. M., and Lurie, I. (2001) ‘Achieving goal congruence in complex environments: The case of welfare reform’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 11: 165–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, P. (2001) ‘Governing by numbers: Why calculative practices matter’, Social Research: An International Quarterly of Political and Social Science, 68: 379–396.Google Scholar
Mills, P. K. (1983) ‘Self-management: Its control and relationship to other organizational properties’, Academy of Management Review, 8: 445–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mintzberg, H. (1989) Mintzberg on management: inside our strange world of organizations. New York, NY: Free Press.Google Scholar
Modell, S. (2004) ‘Performance measurement myths in the public sector: A Research note’, Financial Accountability and Management 20: 39–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nicholson-Crotty, S. and O'Toole., L. J. Jr. (2004) ‘Public management and organizational performance: The case of law enforcement agencies’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 14: 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orr, J. E. (1990) ‘Sharing knowledge, celebrating identity: War stories and community memory in a service culture’ in Middleton, D. S. and Edwards, D. (eds.) Collective remembering: Memory in society, Beverley Hills, CA: Sage, pp. 169–189.Google Scholar
Orr, J. E. (1996) Talking about machines: An ethnography of a modern job. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Ouchi, W. G. (1977) The relationship between organizational structure and organizational control. Administrative Science Quarterly, 22: 95–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perrow, C. (1986) Complex organizations. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Preston, A. (1986) ‘Interactions and arrangements in the process of informing’, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 11: 521–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ricucci, N. M., Meyers, M. K., Lurie, I. and Han, J. S. (2004) ‘The implementation of welfare reform policy: The role of public managers in front-line practices’, Public Administration Review, 64: 438–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rus, D. (2005) Agent control in the organizational literature. MA thesis manuscript: Tilburg University.Google Scholar
Salamon, L. M. and Odus, V. E. (2002) The tools of government: a guide to the new governance. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Simon, H. A. (1947) Administrative behavior. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Vancouver, J. B. and Day, D. V. (2005) ‘Industrial and organisation research on self-regulation: from constructs to applications’, Applied Psychology: An International Review, 54: 155–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weick, K. E. (1996) ‘Drop your tools: An allegory for organizational studies’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 41: 301–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiener, N. (1948) Cybernetics: Or control and communication in the animal and the machine. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Wilensky, H. L. (1964) ‘The professionalization of everyone?’, American Journal of Sociology, 70: 137–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williamson, O. (1971) Corporate control and business behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Zald, M. N. (1978) ‘On the social control of industries’, Social Forces, 57: 79–101.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Accessibility compliance for the PDF of this book is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×