ID: 35930
Authors:
Gerald E. Caiden, Naomi J. Caiden.
Source:
Revista do Serviço Público, v. 52, n. 1, p. 78-104, January-March, 2001. 27 page(s).
Document type: Article (Spanish)
Show Abstract
The article approaches the evolution of performance measurement and programme assessment in public-sector organisations, and it highlights its meaningfulness in present times, referring to cases of developing countries. It elaborates on the main aspects of the implementation of an assessment and measurement system and discusses its scope and limitations. The quest for appropriate measures for the qualitative and quantitative assessment of public-sector organisations is not new. Doubtlessly, in recent years the concern about programme assessment has increased, at the same time, as state reforms advance with new criteria. Thus, performance assessment and measurement have become part of those reforms, geared to a more flexible management, accountability, decentralisation, privatisation and focus on users. Performance assessment and measurement imply obtaining and construing data on several aspects of the productive process: inputs, outputs, outcomes, impact, productivity and user’s satisfaction, inter alia. These distinct aspects expose the complexity of the task and its inherent difficulties. Thus, for example, while it is relatively easy to gather data on inputs, data collection can be highly complex when it is about assessing the impact of a programme, in which the qualitative dimension is more relevant that the qualitative aspect and targets do not allow the performance of an accurate measurement. The introduction of performance assessment and measurement is likely to meet even more difficulties in poor countries than in affluent ones. It is possible that not all governments agree to carry out an assessment of the operation of their programmes for different reasons. On the other hand, for some governments, this task might be postponed to the moment when institutional structures are consolidated and the personnel are more appropriately trained for carrying it out. As a consequence, each country will have to determine not only the opportunity for implementing performance measurement, but also choose which type of measures will develop, according to the specific characteristics of the context in which they will be applied. The conclusion is that performance measurement represents an instrument that may provide more efficiency and effectiveness to public services and propitiate more openness for administration, with more transparency and more accountability. It is therefore advisable to periodically publish the data regarding the performance of public organisations; such as large private corporations do.
