Fragmentation and performance dialogues in public management

Abstract

PurposeLack of knowledge and performance information sharing between actors is one manifestation of fragmentation in public performance management. This study aims to understand what managerial means are used for connecting performance dialogues and how these means affect fragmentation in performance management.Design/methodology/approachIn this cross-sectional research design, the authors reviewed documents, interviewed public managers, observed workshops and held thematic discussions with public managers in one Finnish municipality. To analyze the empirical data, the authors used thematic analysis and both inductive and deductive research approaches.FindingsThe analysis revealed nine managerial means that public managers use for connecting performance dialogues to decrease fragmentation. These were (1) defining the division of labor between different dialogues, (2) assigning resources for performance dialogues, (3) generating convincing narratives for promoting collaboration, (4) providing the same performance information to collaborators, (5) building joint information systems, (6) establishing integrative performance dialogue hubs, (7) naming the gatekeepers, (8) offering training for dialogues and (9) synchronizing performance dialogues. Based on our findings, most of these means can preserve, increase or decrease fragmentation depending on their design.Originality/valueThe results of the study are valuable because the performance management literature has not investigated what managerial means are used to connect performance dialogues and how these means can preserve, increase or decrease fragmentation.

Does performance management system implementation reduce fragmentation in an Indonesian local government?

“…Having many local government units responsible for policy or goal achievement could lead to coordination issues in programme delivery. Thus, collaboration and coordination are problematic in situations in which there is institutional complexity, with various units involved in the provision of services or policy achievement, especially when the various officers and stakeholders involved have different values and priorities (Cejudo et al, 2017; Lagried & Rykkja, 2015; Rajala et al, 2021; ; Rajala & Laihonen, 2022). The lack of cooperation and motivation to collaborate are further exacerbated with the silo mentality, inadequate interpersonal skills, a lack of training and an incentive system which focusses on individual unit achievements (Rajala & Laihonen, 2022).…”

“…Decoupling of performance management practice means that its implementation is generally symbolic, thus PMS practice does not produce tangible changes in the daily activities, leading to a disconnection between policy and practice (Bromley & Powell, 2012). PMS will also be fragmented when information from the system is not used, when PMS officers lack knowledge, and when information sharing is lacking among organisational members who work at different hierarchical levels, or in different divisions within the same organisation (Rajala et al, 2021; Rajala & Laihonen, 2022). Thus, an integrated PMS requires coupling between the various hierarchical levels and the linkage between performance measures and objectives and sharing of information across the various units.…”

“…It could be said that the implementation of PMS, which essentially requires the spirit of competition, will create a tendency to reduce interest in cooperation, both between individual bureaucrats and between organisational sub-units within the bureaucracy. Such a situation will lead to non-integrated PMS, which will result in the dearth of performance information sharing among individuals working at various hierarchical tiers, across diverse departments and functions and even mission fragmentation (Rajala & Laihonen, 2022).…”

“…PMS not only relate to target setting and measurement, but are involved in a holistic process to manage organisational performance and mission achievement. Thus, PMS cover the process of the determination of strategic objectives and goals, the planning and resource allocation to achieve these goals, development of measures and targets to track the achievement of the strategic objectives, the evaluation and feedback process directing employees and integration between performance achievement and the reward and appraisal of officers (Ferreira & Otley, 2009; Otley, 1999; Rajala & Laihonen, 2022).…”

“…However, it has been argued that PMS can also be used to reduce fragmentation in public administration through the creation of shared goals using the concept of a ‘boundary object’, with shared goals used to bind the activities and objectives of different entities (Rajala et al, 2021; Rajala & Laihonen, 2022). Thus, the questions addressed in this paper concern (1) how PMS are implemented and (2) whether the implementation of PMS will reduce fragmentation in public administration.…”