Challenges and Lessons in Implementing Results-Based Management

Evaluation

Volumn 13, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 87-109

  Mayne, John ^a  

^a Adviser on public sector performance ^*  (Canada)

Author keywords

attribution; implementation challenges; organizational learning; performance monitoring; results based management

Indexed keywords

EID: 33847026845     PISSN: 13563890     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1356389007073683     Document Type: Article

References (67)

1. Aucoin, P. (1995) The New Public Management: Canada in Comparative Perspective. Montreal: Institute for Research on Public Policy.
2. Auditor General of Canada (2002) Modernizing Accountability in the Public Sector. Report of the Auditor General of Canada to the House of Commons, ch. 9. Ottawa: Auditor General of Canada.
3. Azevedo, Luis Carlos dos Santos (1999) Developing a Performance Measurement System for a Public Organization: A Case Study of the Rio de Janeiro City Controller's Office, Minerva Program. Washington, DC: Institute of Brazilian Issues, George Washington University. Retrieved (November 2004) from http://www.gwu.edu/%7Eibi/minerva/Spring1999/Luiz.Carlos.Azevedo/Luiz.Carlos.Azevedo.html
4. Baehler, K. (2003) ‘“Managing for Outcomes”: Accountability and Thrust’, Australian Journal of Public Administration 62(4): 23-23.
5. Barrados, M. and J. Mayne (2003) ‘Can Public Sector Organizations Learn?’, OECD Journal on Budgeting 3(3): 87–103.
6. Behn, R. (2000) Rethinking Democratic Accountability. Washington, DC: Brookings Institute.
7. Behn, R. (2002) ‘The Psychological Barriers to Performance Management, or Why isn't Everyone Jumping on the Performance-Management Bandwagon’, Public Performance and Management Review 26(1): 5–25.
8. Binnendijk, A. (2000) Results-Based Management in the Development Cooperation Agencies: A Review of Experience. Background Report, Paris: DAC OECD Working Party on Aid Evaluation. Retrieved (2 May 2005) from http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/17/1/1886527.pdf
9. Bohte, J. and K. J. Meier (2000) ‘Goal Displacement: Assessing the Motivation for Organizational Cheating’, Public Administration Review 60(2): 173–182.
10. Bouckaert, G. and B. G. Peters (2002) ‘Performance Measurement and Management: The Achilles’ Heel in Administrative Modernization’, Public Performance and Management Review 25(4): 359–362.
11. Boyle, R. (2005) ‘Assessment of Performance Reports: A Comparative Perspective’, in R. Schwartz and J. Mayne (eds) Quality Matters: Seeking Confidence in Evaluation, Auditing and Performance Reporting, pp. 279–297. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
12. Boyne, G. A. and J. Law (2005) ‘Setting Public Service Outcome Targets: Lessons from Local Public Service Agreements’, Public Money and Management 25(4): 253–260.
13. CCAF (2002) Reporting Principles: Taking Public Performance Reporting to a New Level. Ottawa: CCAF.
14. Curristine, T. (2005a) ‘Government Performance: Lessons and Challenges’, OECD Journal on Budgeting 5(1): 127–151.
15. Curristine, T. (2005b) ‘Performance Information in the Budget Process: Results of the OECD 2005 Questionnaire’, OECD Journal on Budgeting 5(2): 87–127.
16. Diamond, J. (2005) Establishing a Performance Management Framework for Government. IMF Working Paper, International Monetary Fund. Retrieved (April 2005) from http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/cat/longres.cfm?sk=17809.0
17. Feller, I. (2002) ‘Performance Measurement Redux’, American Journal of Evaluation 23(4): 435–452.
18. Funnell, S. (1993) Effective Reporting in Program Performance Statements. Canberra: Department of Finance.
19. Global Reporting Initiative (1999) Sustainability Reporting Guidelines: Exposure Draft for Public Comment and Pilot Testing. Boston: Global Reporting Initiative.
20. Hatry, H. (1997) ‘We Need a New Concept of Accountability’, The Public Manager 26(3): 37–38.
21. Hirschmann, D. (2002) ‘Thermometer or Sauna? Performance Measurement and Democratic Assistance in the United States Agency for International Development (USAID)’, Public Administration 80(2): 235–255.
22. Hyndman, N. S. and R. Anderson (1995) ‘The Use of Performance Information in External Reporting: An Empirical Study of UK Executive Agencies’, Financial Accountability and Management 11(1): 1–17.
23. Itell, J. (1998) ‘Where are They Now? Performance Measurement Pioneers Offer Lessons from the Long, Hard Road’, The New Public Innovator (May/June): 11–17.
24. Ittner, C. and D. Larcker (2003) ‘Coming up Short on Nonfinancial Performance Measurement’, Harvard Business Review (Nov.): 88–95.
25. Kettl, D. F. (1997) ‘The Global Revolution in Public Management: Driving Themes, Missing Links’, Policy Analysis and Management 16(3): 446–462.
26. Kusek, J. R. Rist and E. White (2003) How will we Know the Millennium Development Goal Results When we See them? Building a Results-Based Monitoring and Evaluation System to Give us the Answers. Retrieved (2 May 2005) from http://www.managingfordevelopmentresults.org/documents/KusekRistWhitepaper.pdf
27. Letts, C. W. Ryan and A. Grossman (2004) Benchmarking: How Nonprofits are Adapting a Business Planning Tool for Enhanced Performance, Internal Benchmarking at a Large Nonprofit: CARE USA. Retrieved (November 2004) from http://www.tgci.com/magazine/99winter/bench3.asp
28. Mayne, J. (2001) ‘Addressing Attribution through Contribution Analysis: Using Performance Measures Sensibly’, Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation 16(1): 1–24.
29. Mayne, J. (2004) ‘Reporting on Outcomes: Setting Performance Expectations and Telling Performance Stories’, Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation 19(1): 31–60.
30. Mayne, J. (2006) ‘Performance Studies: The Missing Link?’, Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation 21(2): 201–208.
31. Mayston, D. J. (1985) ‘Nonprofit Performance Indicators in the Public Sector’, Financial Accountability and Management 1(1): 51–74.
32. Melkers, J. E. and K. G. Willoughby (2001) ‘Budgeter's Views of State Performance-Budgeting Systems: Distinctions across Branches’, Public Administration Review 61(1): 54–64.
33. Meyer, M. W. and V. Gupta (1994) ‘The Performance Paradox’, Research in Organizational Behaviour 16: 309–369.
34. Midwinter, A. (1994) ‘Developing Performance Indicators for Local Government: The Scottish Experience’, Public Money and Management 14(2): 37–43.
35. Moynihan, D. P. (2005) ‘Goal-Based Learning and the Future of Performance Management’, Public Administration Review 65(2): 203–216.
36. Moynihan, D. P. (2006) ‘Managing for Results in State Government: Evaluating a Decade of Reform’, Public Administration Review 66(1): 77–89.
37. Norman, R. (2002) ‘Managing through Measurement or Meaning? Lessons from Experience with New Zealand's Public Sector Performance Management Systems’, International Review of Administrative Sciences 68: 619–628.
38. Norton, D. P. (2002) ‘Managing Strategy is Managing Change’, Balanced Scorecard Report 4(1), retrieved (Dec. 2004) from http://harvardbusinessonline.hbsp.harvard.edu/b01/en/files/newsletters/bsr-sample.pdf;jsessionid=THNHXYQPDH0OKAKRGWCB5VQBKE0YIIPS?_requestid=11865
39. OECD (1997) In Search of Results: Performance Management Practices. Paris: OECD.
40. OECD (2003) Harmonizing Donor Practices for Effective Aid Delivery, Good Practice Papers, DAC Guidelines and Reference Series. Paris: OECD. Retrieved (2 May 2005) from http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/0/48/20896122.pdf
41. OECD (2005) Modernising Government: The Way Forward, ch. 2. Paris: OECD.
42. Office of the Auditor General of Canada (2000) Implementing Results-Based Management: Lessons from the Literature. Ottawa: Office of the Auditor General of Canada. Retrieved (2 May 2005) at http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/domino/other.nsf/html/00rbme.html
43. Pal, L. A. and T. Teplova (2003) Rubik's Cube? Aligning Organizational Culture, Performance Measurement, and Horizontal Management. Ottawa, Carleton University. http://www.ppx.ca/Research/PPX-Research%20-%20Pal-Teplova%2005-15-03%5B1%5D.pdf
44. Perrin, B. (1998) ‘Effective Use and Misuse of Performance Measurement’, American Journal of Evaluation 19: 367–379.
45. Perrin, B. (2002) Implementing the Vision: Addressing Challenges to Results-Focussed Management and Budgeting. Paris: OECD.
46. Perrin, B. (2006) Moving from Outputs to Outcomes: Practical Advice from Governments Around the World. Managing for Performance and Results Series. Washington, DC: IBM Centre for the Business of Government and the World Bank.
47. Pollitt, C. (2001) ‘Integrating Financial Management and Performance Management’, OECD Journal on Budgeting 1(2): 7–37.
48. Pollitt, C. and G. Bouckaert (2000) Public Mangement Reform: A Comparative Analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
49. Rohm, H. (2003) ‘Improve Public Sector Results with a Balanced Scorecard: Nine Steps to Success’ (presentation), the Balanced Scorecard Institute, US Foundation for Performance Measurement. Retrieved (December 2004) from http://www.balancedscorecard.org/files/Improve_Public_Sector_Perf_w_BSC_0203.swf
50. Schick, A. (2003) ‘The Performing State: Reflection on an Idea Whose Time has Come But Whose Implementation has Not’, OECD Journal on Budgeting 3(2): 71–103.
51. Schwartz, R. and J. Mayne (2005) Quality Matters: Seeking Confidence in Evaluation, Auditing and Performance Reporting. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
52. Shergold, P. (1997) ‘The Colour Purple: Perceptions of Accountability across the Tasman’, Public Administration and Development 17: 293–306.
53. Smith, P. (1995) ‘Performance Indicators and Outcome in the Public Sector’, Public Money and Management (Oct.–Dec.): 13–16.
54. Thomas, P. (2005) ‘Performance Measurement and Management in the Public Sector’, Optimum 35(2). Retrieved from http://www.optimumonline.ca/print.phtml?id=225
55. United Nations Development Programme (2004) UNDP Results Framework. Retrieved (19 November 2004) from http://www.gm-unccd.org/FIELD/Multi/UNDP/UNDPResFram.pdf
56. United States General Accounting Office (1997a) The Government Performance and Results Act: 1997 Government-Wide Implementation will be Uneven. GAO/GGD-97–109. Washington, DC: United States General Accounting Office.
57. United States General Accounting Office (1997b) Managing for Results: Analytic Challenges in Measuring Performance. GAO/HEHS/GGD-97–138. Washington, DC: United States General Accounting Office.
58. Uusikylä, P. and V. Valovirta (2004) ‘Three Spheres of Performance Governance: Spanning the Boundaries from Single-Organisation Focus towards a Partnership Network’, EGPA 2004 Annual Conference, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
59. van Thiel, S. and F. L. Leeuw (2002) ‘The Performance Paradox in the Public Sector’, Public Performance and Management Review 25(3): 267–281.
60. Wholey, J. S. (1983) Evaluation and Effective Public Management. Boston: Little, Brown and Co.
61. Wholey, J. S. (1997) ‘Clarifying Goals, Reporting Results’, in D. J. Rog (ed.) Progress and Future Directions in Evaluation: Perspectives on Theory, Practice and Methods, pp. 95–105. New Directions for Evaluation, 76; San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
62. Wholey, J. S. (1999) ‘Performance-Based Management: Responding to the Challenges’, Public Productivity and Management Review 22(3): 288–307.
63. Wholey, J. S. and H. P. Hatry (1992) ‘The Case for Performance Monitoring’, Public Administration Review 52(6): 604–610.
64. Wiggins, A. and P. Tymms (2002) ‘Dysfunctional Effects of League Tables: A Comparison between English and Scottish Primary Schools’, Public Money and Management 22(1): 43–48.
65. Williams, D. (2003) ‘Measuring Government in the Early Twentieth Century’, Public Administration Review 63(6): 643–659.
66. World Bank (2002) Better Measuring, Monitoring, and Managing for Development Results. Development Committee (Joint Ministerial Committee of the Boards of Governors of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund on the Transfer of Resources to Developing Countries). Retrieved (2 May 2005) from http://siteresources.worldbank.org/DEVCOMMINT/Documentation/90015418/DC2002-0019(E)-Results.pdf
67. Zapico-Goni, E. and J. Mayne (eds) (1997) Monitoring Performance in the Public Sector: Future Directions from International Experience. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.