Performance measurement in global governance: Ranking and the politics of variability

Mehrpouya, Afshin; Samiolo, Rita

doi:10.1016/j.aos.2016.09.001

Cited by 79 publications

(97 citation statements)

References 63 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The rapid proliferation of indicators, rankings, and ratings in the polity during the past few decades (Davis et al 2012;Malito et al 2018;Rottenburg et al 2015) speaks of a calculative turn in regulation and governance. For example, a host of "regulatory rankings" (Mehrpouya & Samiolo 2016) now use performance measurement and benchmarking as a basis for understanding and promoting company compliance with stakeholder-defined standards and best practices: Access to Nutrition Index, Access to Seeds Index, Access to Generics Index, Responsible Mining Index, Access to Vaccines Index, Corporate Human Rights Benchmark, and Access to Medicine Index (studied herein).…”

Section: Regulatory Intermediation and Governance By Indicatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Numbers in regulatory intermediation: Exploring the role of performance measurement between legitimacy and compliance

Mehrpouya

Samiolo

2018

Regulation & Governance

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Much regulatory intermediation has come to entail forms of calculation and performance measurement. In this paper we analyze the role of performance measurement in regulatory intermediation in a transnational multistakeholder setting where intermediation lacks an official mandate. We do this through a study of the Access to Medicine Index, which ranks pharmaceutical companies in terms of their access to medicine policies and practices in developing countries. We conceptualize multistakeholder intermediaries as “second order rulemakers” reconciling diverse and often competing implicit and explicit rules across the governance field. We then detail various intermediation roles of performance measurement between attaining input and output legitimacy and enticing compliance among targets. Our case demonstrates how the selective formalization of measurement processes and the related ability to move back and forth from the role of intermediary to that of “ad hoc rulemaker” are important conditions for achieving and maintaining legitimacy. Furthermore, it shows that for multistakeholder intermediaries that rely on performance measurement, compliance by targets depends on the uptake of performance information by powerful constituencies. This illustrates how addressing legitimacy concerns and enticing compliance through performance measurement should be examined as co‐emerging processes.

show abstract

Section: Regulatory Intermediation and Governance By Indicatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Numbers in regulatory intermediation: Exploring the role of performance measurement between legitimacy and compliance

Mehrpouya

Samiolo

2018

Regulation & Governance

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…operations management and management accounting scholars who have focused mainly on the technical aspects of measurement processes such as the design and implementation of measurement tools; the second one brings together researchers from several areas who have investigated an array of social, cultural and behavioural effects of measurement (Smith and Bititci 2017). While studies in these two camps seem complementary, they have rarely been investigated jointly, leading to parallel lines of inquiry (Mehrpouya and Samiolo 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Advancing Performance Measurement Theory by Focusing on Subjects: Lessons from the Measurement of Social Value

Beer

Micheli

2018

Int J Management Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Performance measurement and management (PMM) researchers have recently called for a closer inspection of social controls – the cultural and behavioural aspects of PMM inside organizations – as a complement to longstanding inquiries into technical controls – the rational and structural processes that enable measurement. The authors address this call by first reviewing the principal findings obtained in the field of social value measurement (SVM), which focuses on the measurement of how and to what extent individuals and groups perceive and realize subjective changes (i.e. in knowledge, access and health) from interactions with organizations. Subsequently, the authors distil the main characteristics of SVM research (i.e. the basic conceptualizations, stated purposes and normative principles). They find that SVM tends to highlight the importance of individual and group wellbeing and welfare, aim to understand how organizational actions influence these conditions, and focus on individuals’ lived experiences of measuring or being measured. In comparison, PMM research concentrates on technical controls, relies mainly on notions of systems and structured processes, and assumes people's behaviours are impacted by measures, but does not fully explore their responses. The authors argue that to acknowledge and integrate social aspects of PMM properly into research and practice, subjects – with their thoughts, emotions and experiences – should be included more explicitly in future studies and theorizations.

show abstract

“…25 The late 20 th century also saw the rise in popularity of key performance indicators, 'league tables', and the like, as part of the New Public Management revolution 26 and a shift towards the 'production of performance information with regulatory or quasi-regulatory purposes'. 27 Well-known examples include assigning core research funding to universities in the United Kingdom (and, increasingly, elsewhere), 28 and the evaluation of federal government programmes in the United States. 29 The economic impact of prizes for contemporary art 30 and the grading of restaurants 31 has been observed.…”

Section: Reputation Ranking and Rating A Short Historymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Chinese Social Credit System: A Model for Other Countries?

Síthigh

Siems

2019

Modern Law Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many countries know financial consumer credit ratings, and recent years have also seen a proliferation of rating systems in relation to online platforms and in the ‘sharing economy’, such as eBay, Uber and Airbnb. In the view of many Western observers, however, the emerging Chinese Social Credit System indicates a paradigm shift compared to these former rating systems as it aims for a comprehensive and uniform social rating based on penalty and award mechanisms. By contrast, this article suggests that the evolving forms of the Chinese system should be seen as a specific instance of a wider phenomenon. Thus, it develops a framework that compares different rating systems by reference to their drafters, users, aims, scoring systems, application, use of algorithms, enforcement and accountability; it identifies shortcomings of both low and high interventionist rating systems; and it discusses a range of regulatory approaches and emerging issues that law makers should consider.

show abstract

Performance measurement in global governance: Ranking and the politics of variability

Cited by 79 publications

References 63 publications

Numbers in regulatory intermediation: Exploring the role of performance measurement between legitimacy and compliance

Numbers in regulatory intermediation: Exploring the role of performance measurement between legitimacy and compliance

Advancing Performance Measurement Theory by Focusing on Subjects: Lessons from the Measurement of Social Value

The Chinese Social Credit System: A Model for Other Countries?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About