Performance Monitoring in the Australian Public Service: a Government-Wide Analysis

Alford, John; Baird, Jeanette

doi:10.1111/1467-9302.00070

Cited by 15 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Performance indicators are less precise than actual measures of programme impacts. In our analysis -based on the work of Guthrie (2001, 2003 We also classify the performance measures/indicators based on the system developed by Alford and Baird (1997) , which differentiates among input, process, output and outcome indicators, as well as effi ciency, cost effi ciency, effectiveness, and service quality measures. Appendix 2 gives examples of various types of performance measures/ indicators utilized for the fi ve selected policy output classes.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Chasing Shadows? Performance Measurement of Policy Advice in New Zealand Government Departments

Gregory¹,

Lonti²

2008

Public Administration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Performance measurement is an integral part of the New Zealand model of public management, as it is for many other modern systems of governmental administration. This article examines data on performance indicators for the policy advice function in five government departments, for the years 1992 to 2005, to determine which types of indicators are used, and to gauge the extent to which they offer meaningful information about the quality of policy advice. As part of its managerialist drive in the early 1990s, the government developed conceptual material designed to improve policy advice and management in departments. In general, our findings indicate that these initiatives did not lead over time to the further development of genuinely meaningful measures of the quality of policy advice, and that the indicators that have been used meet narrow managerial rather than broader political needs.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Chasing Shadows? Performance Measurement of Policy Advice in New Zealand Government Departments

Gregory¹,

Lonti²

2008

Public Administration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In their investigation of what they call ‘performance information elements’ (PIEs) used in Australian Public Service departments, 1991–93, Alford and Baird (1997) found that 86% of all PIEs focused on the results end of the ‘production process’. This suggested that performance monitoring has indeed encouraged an orientation towards managing for results rather than a preoccupation with processes.…”

Section: Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…10 10 We have not provided any examples for input and cost effectiveness measures, as they did not exist for these output classes in 1992, 1997 and 2002. Alford and Baird (1997) consider funding figures as input measures. Appropriations and expenditures are reported for each output class.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Accountability or Countability? Performance Measurement in the New Zealand Public Service, 1992–2002

Lonti

Gregory

2007

Aust J Public Adm

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines how output classes and performance indicators have changed between 1992 and 2002 in five selected departments of the New Zealand Public Service. Process, output and largely artificial service quality performance measures have crowded out outcome, efficiency and effectiveness indicators, across the board. Both output classes and performance indicators have been highly labile, though the reasons for this remain speculative in the meantime. The New Zealand state sector is currently implementing a 'managing for outcomes' strategy, intended to overcome too strong a preoccupation with the production of outputs. However, because output classes remain the key feature of the Public Finance Act 1989 the means of ensuring and demonstrating policy effectiveness must be more broadly based than a reliance on the countability of organisational output classes and performance measures.

show abstract

“…Police response times and complaints against police (Collier 2006) Average weeks worked across network participants (Jennings and Ewalt 1998) Output Product or service delivered Number of goods, products and services provided by Government agencies (Carlin 2000). Detections and arrests by police services (Collier 2006) Units produced or service provided (Walker 2001) Outcome Impact of products or service delivered Take-up rates for pensions (Alford and Baird 1997). Public satisfaction with policing (Collier 2006) Value of property lost due to crime (Walker 2001).…”

Section: Performance Reporting and Inter-organizational Dependencementioning

confidence: 99%

Celebrating Adversity: Inter‐organizational Dependence and Public Sector Performance Reporting in the Australian Federal Police

Lacey

Cuganesan

Goode

et al. 2011

Public Administration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many aspects of public policy delivery involve complex networks rather than independent agencies. Yet little work has been done to understand the nature of performance measurements in settings where the performance of one agency is heavily dependent on the activities of other agencies. The issue of dependence has implications for operational and reputational risks. Our case study is focused on performance reporting by the Australian Federal Police (AFP). Our findings indicate that performance reporting remains heavily focused on input and process measures with relatively few output or outcome measures. Contrary to expectation, the AFP did not claim credit for success and attribute poor performance to other stakeholders. However, a higher than expected proportion of the dependent performance measures were positively framed.

show abstract

Performance Monitoring in the Australian Public Service: a Government-Wide Analysis

Cited by 15 publications

References 0 publications

Chasing Shadows? Performance Measurement of Policy Advice in New Zealand Government Departments

Chasing Shadows? Performance Measurement of Policy Advice in New Zealand Government Departments

Accountability or Countability? Performance Measurement in the New Zealand Public Service, 1992–2002

Celebrating Adversity: Inter‐organizational Dependence and Public Sector Performance Reporting in the Australian Federal Police

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About