We review the literature on people management and performance in organizations across a range of disciplines, identifying aspects of management where there is clear evidence about what works as well as aspects where the evidence is mixed or does not yet exist. We organize our discussion by four lenses, or levels of analysis, through which people management can be viewed: (i) individual extrinsic, intrinsic, and psychological factors; (ii) organizational people management, operational management, and culture; (iii) team mechanisms, composition and structural features; and (iv) relationships, including networks, leadership, and individuals’ relationships to their job and tasks. Each of these four lenses corresponds not only to a body of literature but also to a set of management tools and approaches to improving public employees’ performance; articulating the connections across these perspectives is an essential frontier for research. We find that existing people management evidence and practice have overemphasized formal management tools and financial motivations at the expense of understanding how to leverage a broader range of motivations, build organizational culture, and use informal and relational management practices. We suggest that foregrounding the role of relationships in linking people and performance—relational public management—may prove a fertile and interdisciplinary frontier for research and practices.

Monitoring and Evaluation discourse in Africa has evolved to focus on building systems at a national level. While this systemic approach has many advantages, its implementation often runs up against the uncomfortable reality that governments have complex incentives to use evidence, and this evidence can equally contribute to decision making that is neither development-focused nor democratic if values are not part of the conversation. Much of the literature on public-sector reform focuses on evidence-based policy making. While relevant, it does not reflect on values, and this article will argue that acknowledging the central role values play in interpreting evidence is critical to effective national evaluation system building. To make this argument, this article will present and discuss vignettes from the parliaments of Malawi, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia and Zimbabwe that illustrate the pivotal role values have played in interpreting and acting on evidence in a parliamentary context. Finally, it makes a case for the discourse about evidence-based policy making to consider values-based policy making as an appropriate lens for parliaments to acknowledge and engage with the complex landscape of the politics of evidence.

No abstract

No abstract

We review the literature on people management and performance in organisations across a range of disciplines, identifying aspects of management where there is clear evidence about what works as well as aspects where the evidence is mixed or does not yet exist. We organise our discussion by four lenses, or levels of analysis, through which people management can be viewed: (i) individual extrinsic, intrinsic, and psychological factors; (ii) organisational people management, operational management, and culture; (iii) team mechanisms, composition and structural features; and (iv) relationships, including networks, leadership, and individuals’ relationships to their job and tasks. Each of these four lenses corresponds not only to a body of literature but also to a set of management tools and approaches to improving public employees’ performance; articulating the connections across these perspectives is an essential frontier for research. We find that existing people management evidence and practice have overemphasised formal management tools and financial motivations at the expense of understanding how to leverage a broader range of motivations, build organisational culture, and use informal and relational management practices. We suggest that foregrounding the role of relationships in linking people and performance – relational public management – may prove a fertile and interdisciplinary frontier for research and practices.