Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of figures
- List of tables
- Notes on contributors
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Subjective and objective measures of organizational performance: An empirical exploration
- 3 All measures of performance are subjective: More evidence on US federal agencies
- 4 A qualitative evaluation of public sector organizations: Assessing organizational performance in healthcare
- 5 Quantitative approaches towards assessing organizational performance
- 6 Consequences of goal ambiguity in public organizations
- 7 Performance control and public organizations
- 8 Bureaucratic red tape and organizational performance: Testing the moderating role of culture and political support
- 9 All that glitters is not gold: Disaggregating networks and the impact on performance
- 10 Network evolution and performance under public contracting for mental health services
- 11 The design and management of performance-based contracts for public welfare services
- 12 Outsourcing government information technology services: An Australian case study
- 13 International comparisons of output and productivity in public service provision: A review
- 14 Public management and government performance: An international review
- 15 What drives global e-government? An exploratory assessment of existing e-government performance measures
- 16 Public management and organizational performance: An agenda for research
- Index
- References
3 - All measures of performance are subjective: More evidence on US federal agencies
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 22 September 2009
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of figures
- List of tables
- Notes on contributors
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Subjective and objective measures of organizational performance: An empirical exploration
- 3 All measures of performance are subjective: More evidence on US federal agencies
- 4 A qualitative evaluation of public sector organizations: Assessing organizational performance in healthcare
- 5 Quantitative approaches towards assessing organizational performance
- 6 Consequences of goal ambiguity in public organizations
- 7 Performance control and public organizations
- 8 Bureaucratic red tape and organizational performance: Testing the moderating role of culture and political support
- 9 All that glitters is not gold: Disaggregating networks and the impact on performance
- 10 Network evolution and performance under public contracting for mental health services
- 11 The design and management of performance-based contracts for public welfare services
- 12 Outsourcing government information technology services: An Australian case study
- 13 International comparisons of output and productivity in public service provision: A review
- 14 Public management and government performance: An international review
- 15 What drives global e-government? An exploratory assessment of existing e-government performance measures
- 16 Public management and organizational performance: An agenda for research
- Index
- References
Summary
Introduction
This chapter has twin aims. First, I address the important matter of measuring organizational performance and argue that it is a socially-constructed concept; thus, all measures of performance are subjective. I then propose a framework to evaluate such measures. This framework consists of three criteria: validity, reliability, and sensitivity. A perceptual measure of organizational performance is introduced, and this measure is shown to satisfy these criteria as well or better than most measures. However, perceptual measures are vulnerable to common source and related bias. Two ways to assess the viability of this threat are suggested and demonstrated.
Second, this perceptual measure of organizational performance is utilized in an empirical analysis. I test a hybrid model that predicts organizational performance in the twenty-two largest federal agencies using data from the 2000 Merit Principles Survey, US Merit Systems Protection Board. This model features supervisory management and several related constructs as prominent variables. The findings show that management matters a great deal. Frontline supervisors play an important role in organizational performance, and supervisory management is an important determinant of high performance in federal agencies. High performing agencies also tend to have skillful upper-level managers, strong cultures that value employees and emphasize the importance and meaningfulness of the agency's work, and policies that empower those employees. These agencies also tend to have a strong performance orientation, and they strive for workforce diversity.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Public Service PerformancePerspectives on Measurement and Management, pp. 35 - 54Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2006
References
(2003) ‘Sources of public service improvement: A critical review and research agenda’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 13: 367–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (2002) ‘Total quality management and performance: An evaluation of the evidence and lessons for research on public organizations’, Public Performance and Management Review, 26: 111–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brewer, G. A. (2003) ‘When core values and missions collide: Gut-wrenching change in the US Department of Agriculture’. Paper presented at the Seventh Public Management Research Conference, Georgetown University, 9–11 October.
(2005) ‘In the eye of the storm: Frontline supervisors and federal agency performance’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15: 505–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brewer, G. A. and Lee, S. Y. (2005) ‘Federal agencies in transition: Assessing the impact on federal employee job satisfaction and performance’. Paper presented at the Eighth Public Management Research Conference, University of Southern California – Los Angeles, 29 September–1 October.
and (2000) ‘Why elephants gallop: Assessing and predicting organizational performance in federal agencies’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10: 685–711.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (2003) ‘The quality of management and government performance: An empirical analysis of the American states’, Public Administration Review, 63: 206–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1993) Creating a government that works better and costs less: The report of the National Performance Review. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
(2003) Performance-based management: What every manager should do to get results. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
(2005) ‘Individual-level factors and organizational performance in government organizations’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15: 245–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (1999) ‘Public v private perceptions of formalization, outcomes, and justice’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 9: 437–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1995) Thickening government: Federal hierarchy and the diffusion of accountability. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
(2002) The troubled state of the federal public service. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
, and (2000) Governance and performance: New perspectives. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
and (1993) Applied statistics for public administration, 3rd edn. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Co.Google Scholar
and (2002) ‘Public management and organizational performance: The effect of managerial quality’, Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 21: 629–643.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (2004) ‘Unsung impossible jobs: The politics of public management’. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Chicago, IL.
National Academy of Public Administration (1997) Managing succession and developing leadership: Growing the next generation of public service leaders. Washington, DC: National Academy of Public Administration.
National Academy of Public Administration (2002) The 21st century federal manager: A study of changing roles and competencies: Preliminary research findings, Report 1 of the 21st Century Federal Manager Series, Washington, DC: National Academy of Public Administration.
National Academy of Public Administration (2003) First-line supervisors in the federal service: Their selection, development, and management, Report 2 of the 21st Century Federal Manager Series, Washington, DC: National Academy of Public Administration.
National Academy of Public Administration (2004) Final report and recommendations: The 21st Century Federal Manager Series. Washington, DC: National Academy of Public Administration.
National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (2004) The 9/11 Commission report: Final report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States. New York: Norton.
National Commission on the Public Service (2003) Urgent business for America: Revitalizing the federal government for the 21 st Century. Washington, DC: National Commission on the Public Service.
National Partnership for Reinventing Government and the US Office of Personnel Management (2000) Government-wide employee survey. Washington, DC: National Partnership for Reinventing Government and the US Office of Personnel Management.
Partnership for Public Service (2002) Mid-career hiring in the federal government: A strategy for change. A Report by The Partnership for Public Service, Washington DC: The Partnership for Public Service.
and (1986) ‘Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and prospects’, Journal of Management, 12: 531–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and (1984) ‘Situational moderators and leader reward and punishment behaviors: Fact or fiction?’, Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 34: 21–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
and (1983) ‘A spatial model of effectiveness criteria: Towards a competing values approach to organizational analysis.’ Management Science, 29: 363–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2003) Understanding and managing public organizations. 3rd edn. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
and (1999) ‘Galloping elephants: Developing elements of a theory of effective government organizations’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 9: 1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and (1998) ‘The employee-customer profit chain at Sears’, Harvard Business Review, 76 (1): 83–97.Google Scholar
and (2004) ‘Testing a multi-dimensional model of organizational performance: Prospects and problems’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 14: 395–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
US Department of Labor (1992) Government as a high performance employer: A SCANS report for America 2000. Report of The Secretary's Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills. Available at: www.ttrc.doleta.gov/SCANS/Govhpe.htm
US General Accounting Office (2000). Human capital: Managing human capital in the 21st century, GAO/T-GGD-00-77. Washington, DC: U.S. General Accounting Office.
US Merit Systems Protection Board (1992) Federal first-line supervisors: How good are they?Washington, DC: USMerit Systems Protection Board.
US Merit Systems Protection Board (1998) Federal supervisors and strategic human resources management. Washington, DC: US Merit Systems Protection Board.
US Merit Systems Protection Board (1999) Federal supervisors and poor performers. Washington, DC: US Merit Systems Protection Board.
US Merit Systems Protection Board (2001) Merit principles survey 2000. Washington, DC: US Merit Systems Protection Board.
US Merit Systems Protection Board (2003) The federal workforce for the 21st century: Results of the merit principles survey 2000. Washington, DC: US Merit Systems Protection Board.
US Office of Management and Budget (2001) The President's management agenda FY 2002. Available at: www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2002/mgmt.pdf
US Office of Personnel Management (2001) Supervisors in the federal government: A wake-up call. Washington, DC: US Office of Personnel Management.
and (2006) ‘Public management reform and organizational performance: An empirical assessment of the UK Labour Government's public service improvement strategy’, Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 25: 371–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , , , and (2004) ‘On the validity of subjective measures of company performance’, Personnel Psychology, 57: 95–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1989) Bureaucracy: What government agencies do and why they do it. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
- 68
- Cited by