Performance Management For Public Services Architecture Essay

I work in one of the largest, of import and efficient organisation of my state. Since its origin, the finish statement of my organisation had been gross aggregation, and we as directors, have ne’er failed to accomplish our marks. However, in twelvemonth 2004, consequent to the force per unit area from the leading and the concern community, the gross board decided to reform itself in conformity with modern best patterns. Consequently, I attended legion workshops, preparations and seminars on the reform procedure, but I ne’er understood the principle behind all this reformation, chiefly because I ever thought that our public presentation as directors had ever been singular.

So the first inquiry that of course comes to mind in context of this back land is if we truly necessitate a public presentation direction system in a immense and efficient Government organisation like ours. The reply to the inquiry is provided byZoe Radnor and Mary McGuire in their article “ Performance Management in the Public sector-Fact or Fiction ” International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol 53, No 3, 2004, pp 245-260:

In jointing the demand for PMS to be used in order to overhaul the Government Services, the Audit Commission of UK ( 1999 ) emphasises two chief grounds, viz. , the demand:

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

I ) to better public services i.e. ( through increased economic system, efficiency and effectivity in service bringing ) and

two ) to reenforce answerability, so that organisations are clearly held to account for the resources they use and the results achieved.

Having said that, the confusion in this respect is still common as appreciated by Lebas ( 1995 ) , mentioned inRadnor, Z & A ; Maguire, M article “ Performance Management in the Public sector-Fact or Fiction ” International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol 53, No 3, 2004, pp 245-260.It clarifies that public presentation measuring includes steps based on cardinal success factors, like input, end product, past accomplishments and future potency, while Performance direction includes preparation, teamwork, duologue, direction manners, shared vision, employee engagement, inducements like wagess etc.

So what is Performance Management?Armstrong ( 2000 )defines public presentation direction as a “strategic and incorporate procedure that delivers sustained success to administrations by bettering the public presentation of people who work in them and by developing the capablenesss of single subscribers and squads“ . Indeed, harmonizing to Moullin ( 2002 )andde Bruijn ( 2001 ) , the aims of public presentation direction at the bosom of the authorities reform docket are:

  • rationalisation, in footings of size, cost and maps ;
  • the debut of more effectual systems of fiscal answerability ;
  • greater transparence in the operation of these public establishments ;
  • the upgrading of the accomplishments base of the sector and the modernisation of its functional rules, processs and systems ; and
  • the development of a realistic wage policy based on public presentation


Traditionally public presentation was merely measured in footings of fiscal and accountable additions or losingss. However Kaplan & A ; Norton in 1992 changed this construct in position of the emerging planetary tendencies. They realized the demand to associate fiscal and non-financial steps of public presentation and placing cardinal public presentation steps, which led to the outgrowth of “ Balanced Score Card ” attack.It is defined as “ a direction model that, translates an organisation ‘s mission and scheme into a comprehensive set of public presentation steps that provides the model for a strategic measuring and direction system “ Balanced Scorecard ” ( Kaplan & A ; Norton, 1996 ) ” .

How would I implement a strategic public presentation direction system in my organisation?

Clearly devise and joint the organisation ‘s vision and scheme ;

This is one of the two most of import issues which need to be addressed while seeking to implement a Balanced Scorecard in a Government organisation. It is to be devised in a mode maintaining in position the fact that success of a Government organisation can non be simply judged through fiscal additions. It involves a batch of interest holders and making public value is its primary nonsubjective. So the development and understanding to a rationale Destination Statement is the base and on it depends the whole facade of a balanced scorecard.

Clearly explain the thought of a Performance Management System to all

This is the 2nd pre-requisite and would include my higher-ups, co-workers and subsidiaries, and what we can accomplish through its execution. I say so because there is unequivocal possibility that it might be mistaken for a public presentation measurement system and hence it ‘s existent importance is non realized at all. As Kaplan & A ; Norton have remarked in their book“ Balanced Scorecard ” HBS Pres 1996s, pp 272: ” The difference between a measuring and a direction system is elusive but important. ”

In this context, I would take the undermentioned stairss in order to implement a balanced scorecard in my organisation,

Implementing the direction system in little balls

As the finish statement of my organisation would be a reasonably big papers due to its broad array of maps, it is improbable that all facets of the statement will be capable to immediate action. However the two primary countries would be roll uping optimal grosss and maximal taxpayer ‘s facilitation.

Communication of the vision and scheme to the center directors

This is really of import because the vision and scheme usually stays with the top direction in our organisation. To successfully accomplish the ends it is vitally of import to pass on it to the mid degree directors, so that they can non merely align themselves with the demands of future but besides communicate the vision efficaciously downstream. It would besides assist them to aline their personal ends and marks with the organisation ‘s vision.

Designation of the cardinal public presentation indexs

The following measure would be to place the KPI ( cardinal public presentation indexs ) that best link the organisation ‘s vision and scheme to its consequences. Specifying them would demo how my organisation creates value for each cardinal stakeholder by demoing clear cause-and-effect relationships between strategic aims. To develop them, I would follow the theoretical account as proposed byAaron A. Estis & A ; Peat Marwick, Paper presented at the 1998 Conference of the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management – ( The Balanced Scorecard – Using a Private Sector Technique to the Public Sector ) .

This model public sector balanced scorecard includes the following four positions:

  • Operational efficiency
  • Customer
  • Mission achievement
  • Organizational acquisition

The lone difference between the private sector and the populace sector balanced scorecard is that the populace sector attack includes the mission achievement position and does non include the internal perspective.A The alteration reflects that fact that a public bureau ‘s mission is frequently unrelated to fiscal success or run intoing client demands as is the instance with private organisations. My cardinal indexs would be:

aˆ? Mission Accomplishment
o Optimum Revenue Collection
O Responsible use of budgets ( public money )
o No lagging or laxness or sloppiness in outgo

aˆ? Customer / Taxpayer
o Facilitation
O No ailments of corruptness
o Simplification of revenue enhancement Torahs & A ; processs
o Taxpayer voluntary conformity

aˆ? Operational Efficiency
o Simplification of Torahs
o Maximum usage of IT systems
o Minimum contacts with clients
o Speedy responses to taxpayer questions
aˆ? Organizational Learning & A ; Growth
o Staff development and preparation
o Performance inducements like fiscal wagess
O Merit based Promotions

Establishing aims that support the organisation ‘s vision and scheme ;

Following I would wish to believe about what my administration demands to make next in the following twelvemonth to 18 months, if it is to accomplish the results described in the Destination Statement. I would sum up these in the signifier of a set of precedence Strategic Activity Objectives. So these aims would be something like this

  • Enhancing taxpayer facilitation through giving a modern mentality to the organisation. Elimination from the outdated bureaucratic system ( revenue enhancement remunerator friendliness )
  • Announcing fiscal inducements for better workers coupled with zero tolerance on incidents of corruptness
  • Bettering substructure, and doing usage of some top of the line IT systems specially designed and suited to my organisation for revenue enhancement remunerators questions and database care
  • Keeping rigorous vigil of the primary nonsubjective i.e. gross aggregation

Associating aims in a strategic linkage theoretical account and develop effectual steps and meaningful criterions ;

By now I should be able to demo how the activity aims will associate to the bringing of the result aims. For that I need to make the following to hold the feel for whether these activities are traveling the administration in the right way – towards accomplishing the Destination Statement.

Allotment of resources and taking action

Once the aims are set, so appropriate budgeting of the concerned sections is necessary measure enabling them to get down taking actions towards accomplishing those strategic aims. ( Bettering infra-structure )

Guaranting proper communicating to the employees ; cascading the scorecard

The following really of import measure is to pass on the aims and the steps to the employees and monitoring and actuating them towards a broad credence of the steps ; it would be truly of import to seek to aline their ends with the overall scheme and easing their personal development through preparations, seminars and symposiums as portion of the procedure.

Training would be providedto allow forces to assist them decently do procedure betterments

Monitor public presentation by making appropriate reappraisal system

Using the Balanced Scorecard promotes more nonsubjective and analytical treatments based on a shared position of what needs to be done: it provides factual information about what is go oning, enabling direction squads to go more efficient and effectual at implementing scheme. So the best manner to utilize this PMS is to hold to reexamine it on a regular footing.

Establish a wages and acknowledgment system to further public presentation betterments:

Administrations should seek to bind any wages and acknowledgment system to public presentation betterment as measured by the organisational BSC.

Collect and analyze public presentation informations and compare existent consequences with coveted public presentation ;

That would be the concluding portion of my PMS. I would roll up the relevant informations and so would compare it with the coveted consequences. This would non merely assist me track advancement but would besides supply me with the chance to do appropriate amendments in my KPI every bit good as strategic aims. This would be sort of my reappraisal of what I had developed and to mensurate the efficaciousness of it.

Barriers to the execution of Performance Management System

Implementing a balanced scorecard is non a piece of bar. AsWholey, Director of US General Accounting Office cited in Aristigueta, 1999, p.5 provinces “ there are a host of political, bureaucratic, conceptual and proficient jobs in implementing such a government of extended PIs for different public services.

Kaplan & A ; Norton in their book“ Balanced Scorecard ” HBS Pres 1996s, pp 285hold categorized the barriers to successful execution as “ Structural ” and “ Organizational ” defects.

Structural defects are easier to rectify because it occurs because of a deficiency of apprehension of the Scorecard, but they do non supply counsel nor provide footing for resource allotment, strategic enterprises and linkage to of import budgetary disbursement.

Organizational defects in execution of a scorecard are manifested in the undermentioned mode which is rather true for my organisation every bit good:

Taking Performance Management as a baffled termis the biggest barrier. We may hold general understanding about what public presentation direction is but every bit shortly as we interact with people in my workplace, we may happen that there are tonss of thoughts about it in pattern. Very few people would hold an apprehension of public presentation direction as the full procedure. Regardless of what I say, a individual ‘s thoughts about public presentation direction are formed on the occupation, through personal experience. This can make a terrible execution job. This is precisely the state of affairs I was in when the reform procedure in my organisation started.

Employees can see PMS as a new penalty tool acquired by the top direction,because in our organisation there is a general understanding among employees that all modern direction theories revolve around occupation cuts, unneeded answerability and hence would be used by the top direction to carry through these two designs.

Scorecard development is left to middle directionbecause either the top direction would be excessively busy in making the “ large things ” or would non give it the right accent because they may acquire under the feeling that what we can make with the PMS can non be measured, and in a gross roll uping organisation, any public presentation that cant be measured is non a public presentation.

No rational committedness & A ; training from the top directionmay destroy the whole thing. Management might utilize this tool as public presentation measuring, and alternatively of utilizing it as a direction system for the whole organisation, they might curtail its efficaciousness to carry throughing short term marks and ends. Furthermore, apart from demoing committedness to the new system, executives need to shepherd the procedure. They must train their subsidiaries so that degree of direction can go on the cascading procedure. So, apart from defending the procedure, executives must learn, show, necessitate, proctor, and commit to it

Poor communicating about Performance direction systemcould go another of import barrier to successful execution in my organisation. PMS is, above all else, about pass oning. Communicate efficaciously with employees during the full public presentation direction procedure that ‘s from end puting to assessments, and public presentation is likely to better, and jobs to be reduced. Communicate ill and the opposite happens. I might see this the biggest challenge in our old colonial manner bureaucratic system.

Not taking the employees on boardwould besides be a large issue in our organisation because the employees are usually wholly ignored in such activities and procedures except for nominal engagement. If public presentation direction system betterment does non include executives, directors, the human resources section, and employees, it is likely to neglect. All must hold input into the procedure, and normally, all must redevelop their apprehension of the intent and benefits of the procedure.

Internal political relations or organisational gamblingcan move as a large barrier, sing the size of the organisation and different groupings. I can easy cite an illustration of implementing a Post Clearance Audit system in my organisation where vested involvements politicized and negated the difficult work of the undertaking squad. Similarly, as a balanced scorecard by and large involves the development of strategic ends and subsequent steps, opposing groups may do developments of programs that are non accomplishable.

Culture of Crustis besides prevailing in my organisation ; the good entrenched bureaucratism is used to see every spot of alteration with intuition and to the extent of mocking and roasting it. So execution of a PMS can besides be viewed as an unneeded rational exercising, waste of money and of no good usage.

Resistance to Changeis besides a large barrier. In instance of my organisation, it straight conflicts with the old power hungry bureaucratic system, which believes in doing connexions and deriving personal benefits, and where simplification of Torahs, regulations and processs and taxpayer friendliness might be seen as a dent in powers.

Technological & A ; Financial Constraintscan besides endanger the whole procedure as the top direction demands to be convinced to acquire blessing of the immense fiscal support for geting an IT system, carry oning classs for staff preparation and accomplishments development.

How to get the better of the barriers to execution of a Performance Management System

The cardinal attack to get the better of the above is to implement a systematic and structured betterment procedure to underpin the measuring system.

Puting the context right

There are two ways to put context, both of which are necessary. The first is to incorporate public presentation steps with the long-run ends of the organisation. We should concentrate on the taxpayer ‘s coveted hereafter — a vision — and so find advancement toward the vision. Program public presentation must impact the quality of service for the taxpayers, if merely indirectly. Any public presentation measuring system that does n’t include results steps for clients, will inform determination shapers that they are making the work right, non that they are making the right work. The patronage of my organisation is no longer satisfied with information about how much gross was collected or how the public money was spent. They merely want the gross board to work in lines with modern best patterns as in the developed states, so that they can vie globally. This should be our end to understand what is expected of us and why, instead than deploring about the powerful yesteryear.

Committedness from Leaderships

If leaders in my organisation are non committed to utilizing public presentation informations, so set uping that committedness before traveling frontward is a must. Lasting alteration can non be accomplished merely by top-down orders ; such alteration requires engagement and committedness from employees, stakeholders, and clients. Establishing and utilizing a public presentation direction system is hard and takes clip. Without leading, opposition will get the better of the best purposes. Management has an duty to pass on its purposes and grounds for implementing such a system.

Development of Capacity

Employees must hold the capacity to develop steps, or they will utilize whatever “ steps ” are already available. Again, senior direction must construct capacity by first helping sections in placing ends, mission, and desired results, and secondly assist them invent steps that they believe will supply the proper feedback to bespeak public presentation. Finally, they should assist directors and employees enhance their ability to utilize the information to better public presentation continuously.

Focus on betterment and wages alternatively of penalty

If measurement focal points on negative answerability, directors and employees will seek to avoid answerability when things go incorrectly, as it usually happens in my organisation. But if measuring is seen as a tool for betterment and fright is driven out, originative tenseness — the spread between today ‘s public presentation and the vision — can work its thaumaturgy. In sing results for a plan, we need to take some clip to place the major outside forces that affect the coveted results. This will be a helpful undertaking, both for finding the best schemes or attacks to implement and for detecting and analyzing existent public presentation.

Stakeholder Feedback

When planing any system, the interior decorators must cognize what the information will be used for and who the audience is. All information is produced for some ground. A public presentation measuring system should supply information to policymakers and directors so they can do better determinations. If the stakeholders who are supposed to utilize the informations to do determinations do n’t read, utilize or make n’t understand the system, so it is bound to neglect. The engagement of stakeholders in placing results besides raises the consciousness that authorities can non accomplish most results by moving entirely ; success requires multiple organisations join forcesing together. By prosecuting stakeholders outside the authorities, organisations can admit and redefine their functions in the system and assist set up collaborative understandings.

Linkage between public presentation and resource allotment

For many authoritiess, the ultimate purpose of direction based on public presentation steps is to incorporate plan public presentation and outcome information with the budget procedure. During the budget procedure is the natural clip to put ends and discuss consequences. Approaches scope from budgets that include public presentation information to budgets that allocate financess harmonizing to desired results, irrespective of section. But incorporating public presentation steps into the budget procedure is non easy. The budget procedure is and should be a political 1. Besides, factors outside an bureau ‘s control will impact the steps.

Bureaucratic Uniformity

Bureaucrats like to do everything expression likewise. But one size does non suit all. Coercing uniformity across distinguishable bureaus and sections prohibits flexibleness and ignores differences within the field of authorities. We need to retrieve that the purpose of public presentation steps is to supply dependable and valid information on public presentation. We should non allow signifiers and stiff definitions undermine that purpose.

References & A ; Bibliography

Armstrong, M. ( 2000 ) , Performance Management – Key Strategies and Practical Guidelines, 2nd ed. , Kogan Page, London De Bruijn, H. ( 2001 ) , Pull offing Performance in the Public Sector, Rout shelf, London, Drucker, Peter F. , “ The Theory of Business ” , Harvard Business Review, Sep.-Oct. 1994, p. 95.

“ Harvard Business Review Balanced Scorecard Report. ” Harvard Business Review, 2002

Kaplan, Robert S. , and David P. Norton. The Balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy into Action. Harvard Business School Press, 1996.

Kaplan, Robert S. , and David P. Norton. “ Having Trouble with Your Strategy? Then Map It. ” Harvard Business Review, September/October 2000, pp. 167-176.

Kaplan, Robert S. , and David P. Norton. “ Measuring the Strategic Readiness of Intangible Assets. ” Harvard Business Review, February 2004, pp. 52-63.

Kaplan, Robert S. , and David P. Norton. The Strategy-Focused Organization: How Balanced Scorecard Companies Thrive in the New Business Environment. Harvard Business School Press, 2000.

Kaplan, Robert S. , and David P. Norton. Strategy Maps: Converting Intangible Assetss into Tangible Outcomes. Harvard Business School Press, 2004.

Kaplan, Robert S. , and David P. Norton. “ Using the Balanced Scorecard as a Strategic Management System. ” Harvard Business Review, January/February 1996, pp. 75-85.

Niven, Paul. Balanced Scorecard Step-by-Step: Maximizing public presentation & A ; Maintaining consequences, ISBN 0-471-07872-7. Copyright A© 2002 by John Wiley & A ; Sons, Inc. , New York

Epstein, Mark J. and Jean-Francois Manzoni, “ The Balanaced Scorecard and Tableau De Bord: Translating Strategy into Action ” , Management Accounting, August 1997, p. 28.

Kaplan R S and Norton D P ( 1992 ) “ The balanced scorecard: steps that thrust public presentation ” ,Harvard Business ReviewJan – Feb pp71-80.

Kaplan, Robert and David Norton, “ The Balanced Scorecard — Measures That Drive Performance ” , Harvard Business Review, January-February 1992, p. 71.

Kaplan, Robert and David Norton, “ Using the Balanced Scorecard As a Strategic Management System ” , Harvard Business Review, January-February 1996, p. 75

Kaplan, Robert S. and David P. Norton, “ Why Does Business Necessitate A Balanced Scorecard ” , Journal of Strategic Performance Measurement, Feb/Mar 1997 Vol. 1, No. 1, p. 5.

Moullin, M. ( 2002 ) , Delivering Excellence in Health and Social Care, Open University Press, Buckingham

Porter, Michael E. , “ What is Strategy ” What is Strategy ” , Harvard Business Review, Nov.-Dec. 1996, p. 61

Schneider adult male, Arthur, “ Why Balanced Scorecards Fail ” , Strategic Performance Measurement, January 1999, Particular Edition